about the Ferrocell (ferrolens)

[Markoul]

Using your language, the pencil is the magnetizer at the magnet factory. Once the line is drawn, the pencil is no longer needed.

I see, so in my model you suggest the pencil line is the magnet.

Well, I say the magnet factory made the pencil thus the magnet and the magnet draws the lines on the paper thus the magnetic field.

So now you are saying the lines (field) will stay there permanently thus the pencil (magnet) is not more necessary and can be disposed.

However, this in our case is not feasible since we know from experience that by the time the magnet vanishes so does its field. Therefore the field radiates out from the magnet and radiation means necessarily flow thus movement.

There is no such think like a static flow.

I believe these field lines are continuously drawn in space by the magnet otherelse the lines would remain fixed in space even when the magnet was moved or removed.

Fixed phenomena are incompatible with relativity theory. And this is not how nature works.

EM

[Markoul]

They are not, and should not be thought off as, real particles. ... They exchange energy and momentum through the quantum fields and this can be modelled by a sum of various particles. So you cannot detect a virtual photon with your photon detector and measure its frequency because the virtual photon isn't really a photon.
John.

Personally, I am not convinced that elementary the particles which flow inside the magnetic flux lines are photons as mainstream science says. If there are photons then there must be a frequency involved and they never say what this frequency is...

[bistander]

Reply

I see, so in my model you suggest the pencil line is the magnet.

Well, I say the magnet factory made the pencil thus the magnet and the magnet draws the lines on the paper thus the magnetic field.

So now you are saying the lines (field) will stay there permanently thus the pencil (magnet) is not more necessary and can be disposed.

However, this in our case is not feasible since we know from experience that by the time the magnet vanishes so does its field. Therefore the field radiates out from the magnet and radiation means necessarily flow thus movement.

There is no such think like a static flow.

I believe these field lines are continuously drawn in space by the magnet otherelse the lines would remain fixed in space even when the magnet was moved or removed.

Fixed phenomena are incompatible with relativity theory. And this is not how nature works.

EM

I see, so in my model you suggest the pencil line is the magnet.

No. Pencil line represents the line of force.

There is no such think* like a static flow.

*thing?

Yes, correct, there is no flow in the static magnetic field.

Fixed phenomena are incompatible with relativity theory. And this is not how nature works.

You stand still in one position and observe a rock on the ground. That rock on the ground is a fixed phenomenon relative to you.

Personally, I am not convinced that elementary the particles which flow inside the magnetic flux lines are photons as mainstream science says. ...

Please provide a reference.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Richard E. Cadle

Can anyone tell me who Richard E. Cadle is or where (how) I can find more information about him or his work? He is named as author of a paper on magnetics referenced in a re-draft of the ferrocell wiki article.

Thanks,

bi

Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ferrocell

[Iamnuts]

Impossible.

If you have a changing magnetic field it is known that it propagates
at C. That being said it doesn’t seem there’s a chance for it to flow.
John.

[Selfsimilarity]

Well guys, I think there is motion in permanent magnetism, we just simply do not yet understand how to interact with it, thats why we cant travel space and remain locked on our small beautiful planet

To show you why I think that:

Even when you use iron filings to show magnetic field, you can see constructive/destructive wave interferrence patterns (which you refere to as lines of force).



This is not a since wave, nor a cosine wave, its two spin-waves, toroidal wave, consisting of two opposed spins neutralizing the net-motion effect, creating a standing wave that looks static to an observer, like the pattern of our fingerprint, also having maximas and minimas through wave interferrence. Humanity does not know this kind of wave that creates the fingerprint.

You can also observe constructive/destructive wave interferrence in cloud formations. There are "lines of clouds".



For a hurricane, you can see two opposed spin motions, just like the ferrocell, but not in perfect balance, but one spin is stronger than the other, therefore, for an observer, it looks like motion. The stronger the spin difference, the faster the motion.





We measure the permanent magnetic field in gauss, which does not explain the constructive/destructive wave interferrence pattern (the bumbs the gauss meter should show when you move it over the lines of force).

When you move the gauss meter closer to the magnet, the field strenth increases "linearly", but you cant measure the constr./destr. field variations that iron filings AND ferrocell and clouds and our fingerprint show. There must be a frequency and wavelength of some sort present to create this pattern.

In general, when the two spins are equal, it looks "static", when they are out of balance, there is motion. The stronger the spin difference, the faster the motion appears.

I think, you guys havent really gone through my webpage content yet Its pretty obvious there is some form of wave missing in our understanding.

What is Magnetism – Some Thoughts – An Analysis investigating Magnetism Energy Dynamics via Ferrocell (Light) & CRT (Electrons) & Matter (Iron filings). Click on the picture below to see my powerpoint presentation

What is the missing 75% dark energy if not some form of wave not understood?

How to imagine the spin wave is the most difficult, as we are not used to it.

It must be a pulse. All energy, focused to a point (the infinite di-electric energy potential), that pulses/spins out into a circle/sphere, going back to its origin, the point.

The big bang idea fits perfectly, simply missing that there cant be only explosion, but that there must be the way back to the origin as well, which results in a pulse-like motion, continuous expantion, contraction, back and forth, from point to sphere, back to point.



Notice the point forming between two repulsive magnets seen with ferrocell. This is completely hidden in iron filings, therefore, we lack this understanding of the point-source, which when expanding and contracting in opposed spin motion, results in a toroidal pattern.


Fibonacci says, its all about ratio. The only mathematical row already being defined by 2 instead of 3 number sequence. Nature's efficiency and beauty.
I say, this is referreing to the two opposed spin-waves and their ratio. What they are made of is the aether. What the aether is made of is the wrong focus. Its the fundamental wave, which we cant find out what its made of. Its the thing that carries electromagnetism. What the electromagnetic toroidal pulse-waves can do is the thing we should globally focus to.

We need to find the frequency that defines the lines of force-pattern, the constructive/destructive wave that creates it. That means, if we can measure the frequency/ratio of the two opposed spins creating a hurricane or a fingerprint or a permanent magnet, we will have it all Ferroell shows exactely that. The two opposed spins and their equilibrium. A standing wave, "static" permanent to an observer. By vibrating a tank of water, and one could think there is "static matter-like" patterns forming on the surface, but nothing is actually static.

[bistander]

Nice

Hi Self,

Thanks for the nice little essay on your view. I don't agree with it all, and will attempt to organize and compose my views.

In the mean time, I assembled a crude ferrocell today. I think it was like about $25 of stuff from Amazon and about 30 minutes. Didn't even make much of a mess. Fooled around with lighting and sight angles for a couple of hours. I think it works pretty well.

Just used 1 x 3" specimen slides. Good enough for starters. Minimum buy on the slides was like 200, so enough for practice. Got a case of new old stock window glass if I want to go big.

Intent was to investigate coreless electromagnetic influence. I thought Brian or someone was looking into that but haven't seen anything. Once I get a decent cell I know I can put some serious amperes near it.

Regards,

bi

[Selfsimilarity]

Wonderful news Bi,

We need electronic cracks to work on Electromagnetism & ferrocell.
I definitely expect some unknown to be revealed by the right experiment

[bistander]

Not so fast

Is De-Broglie Bohm (pilot wave) Theory gaining ground today over the Copenhagen Interpretation?

Dear All,

The omnipresent aether medium is coming back in science today with new proof of concept experiments and and as an alternative theory to the Copenhagen interpretation fallacy: The theory now contradicting the establishment and gaining ground over time is an old theory namely the the pilot wave theory:

Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like? - YouTube (pilot wave theory)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZPVp0NGEYY (Nassim Haramein explaining)

DUAL WALKERS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_wave_theory. (biased view)

Elementary particles and quanta of energy are all manifestations of this same omnipresent medium (aerher), in the form of vibrations, condensations, waves, and in general distortions of this aether universal dark (i.e. we can not detect it yet but only can see the effects of interaction with it like EM SNF WNF and Gravity).



EM

Famous Experiment Dooms Alternative to Quantum Weirdness
By
NATALIE WOLCHOVER
October 11, 2018

Oil droplets guided by “pilot waves” have failed to reproduce the results of the quantum double-slit experiment, crushing a century-old dream that there exists a single, concrete reality.

https://news.google.com/articles/CBM...S&ceid=US%3Aen

Timely article found on Google news.

bi

[Selfsimilarity]

Not so fast

Did you read the comments section? There are some smart inputs
I consider the quantamagazine to potentially be confirmation biased if its about new theories invalidating or expanding the thinking of quantum physics.

1. Water can not possibly simulate electromagnetic aether, which can be compressed or expanded and having an attribute such as increasing energy density by compression up to infinite when compression reaches a point-singularity. This is shown by trending wavelength of light relative to energy density: The smaller the wavelength the higher the energydensity. An infinitely small wavelength would not exist in our 3 dimensions anymore but have an infinite energy density.

2. One wave is expansion from point-source, one is compression towards point-source. Run both against each other, and you get quantum wierdness and doppler effect-like superpositions. How should water be able to mimic such an effect?

3. We would at least need two droplets at the same time on the same location to be representative

[Iamnuts]

Photons

Photons are usually treated with second quantization, which mathematically assumes that the vacuum is composed by the fields of the elementary particles at a ground state, and creation operator manifests the elementary particle at that point in time.

John.

[Iamnuts]

Aspect.

It’s worth having a look at Alain Aspect’s work.
Bell’s inequality is worth a go,too.
John.

[Markoul]

SSML,

Bravo! Excellent presentation and content as always in your postings.

The say that the spacing between the iron filings lines are due the individual filings dipole interactions and interference. Also the spacing in the lines on the ferrocell is due the finite numbers of LEDs in the ferrocell. Remember you can see in the ferrocell only what you shine into.

When we shine a single source light we see in the ferrocell the the flux as a cloud not discrete lines. In your picture the distance between the rings in the standing wave as well on the iron filings rings you depict is equal with λ wavelength.

So if this was true then we could easily detect the standing wave oscilation in the dipole magnet probably at the x-band microwave range. But there is no such frequency present on a permanent rear earth magnet.

However you are right there is a standing wave oscilation from the axial rotation of the domain wall disk which is the generator of the polar vortices spin. These vortices remember are not at the same plane as water whirls but axial placed back to back! If you ran a simulation you will see that this kind of conficuration of vortices produces the simultaneously inward and outward flow needed to generate the two polar standing waves on the poles.

However the oscillation frequency is much higher than you thing... I've estimated it at the range of 10^21 Hz!! That is zettahertz, and unfortunately currently there is no device which can measure such frequencies.

Kind Regards,

EM

[Markoul]

bi and iamnuts,

Of course there is circulation (flow) of virtual particles inside each individual flux line of the field (and I am not referring to the ferrocel imprint).

It's a curled radiation and they say it is photons. Google it.

So magnetic lines consist of photons even in free space.

But i don't believe it.

bi,

Here is Brian's video with the coil experiment:

https://tinyurl.com/yckkesev

[Markoul]

What particle is streaming inside the magnetic flux lines?

Here is the link with answers:

https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=414

The best respond from the above link is this one:

Follow-Up #2: back to Maxwell's mechanical fields
Q:
I really want to know what the magnetic field is made up of? Please do not use photons in your answer as we all know magnetic fields are not composed of photons. Douglas's question was never answered. Douglas was not asking about the electromagnetic field which is most closely associated with the photon. The answers provided were incomplete and not relavant to Douglas's question. What is the magnetic field made up of? Here is what modern day science actually knows about Magnetic fields. The honest answer is we do not know what a magnetic field is. What we do know is that a Magnet field is generated by the motion of electrostatic charges within the the magnet itself. The electric charges being electrons. The electrons move in a coherent and synchronized fashion which causes a strong magnetic field to be projected out from the magnet. What we do not know is what that field is made up of. Some people used to say that it was made up of magnetic monopoles. Magnetic monopoles have never been discovered so there is a good chance, a very good chance that theory is incorrect. It is my opinion that a magnetic field is not made up of any particle field at all. Douglas, think of a magnetic field as being a direct deformation of physical space. All pure fields must work this way. They must be mechanical deformations of space. You can think of space being a low density, high tension solid elastic. The magnetic field is a mechanical deformation of space itself. I Wish you would print this question and answer but we both know you won't.
- Mark (age 58)
Florida

EM