The Primer Field

[tachyon]

last time I read a comment of lapoint : "right now I'm on a business meeting and the 4th video will take longer time than I expected" the next day he quits.. I don't think he's given anything new this is the same as most atom ring theories..

[SilverToGold]

Hi Ein~+ein,

I'm no expert but I will try to answer your questions.

a) No he does not directly do so. But he does have the patent (I posted earlier) submitted and calls it an electrical generator. If you read it, seems he is implying it's an energy machine tapping into "fusion reaction" - so it does generate more energy than is put into the system (at least he claims it does). He is using modern traditional physics to give some acceptable basis for his invention.

b) Don't have time to read all of that thread. LaPoint claims magnetism is the underlying principle behind the structure of the galaxies, sun and heavenly bodies. This is in direct conflict with modern astrology which claims it's gravity. That is my understanding. LaPoint also claims this goes down to the level of light and atoms - not just large heavenly bodies.

c) If you watch the videos, he shows with his device, the plasma rotating within the "static" magnetic fields. I don't know if it is due to the magnets or maybe perhaps some effect of the earth? But LaPoint seems quite convinced that it's from the magnetic fields.

I suggest you watch the rest of the videos and see what you glean from it.

SilverToGold: I've only watched a part of the 1st video but...

a) Does Lapointe claim he can produce free energy from primer fields?

b) If you've watched all the films, what do you know/think of Lapointe's debate with the Electric Universe community?

I'm referring to that Thunderbolts Forum thread. Primer Fields is the top-rated topic with 95 posts on the topic.

c) What does he mean when he says the field always moves?

I only see the plasma sphere change position when he moves the magnets. And iron filings on a sheet of paper above a bar magnet only move when you move the magnet beneath.

Actually, what led me to the Primer Fields, was a response to a thread I started because I was curious about the nature of that field: Is the Magnetic Field around a Wire Harvestable Free Energy?

[SilverToGold]

Well I can't say that I'm surprised.

From his YouTube Channel:

"The rest of the PF series has been canceled. I will leave the existing videos up. I will be posting an explanation for all of this later this week. I have many concerns, but mainly I am just too busy with work to continue any further work on these videos.

Sorry to disappoint you.

Cheers, Dave"

But we still have his patent application and the 3 videos. Lots of stuff there.

Unfortunately the rest is canceled. Lapoint will be posting an explenation on his youtube channel.

[SilverToGold]

True, he does not talk about a "free energy" device but this is from his patent:

Page 3 [0065]

"Because of the fusion reaction, the high voltage ring receives the produced energy in the form of electricity which is output from 13 (Output connection point)"

I think one of the underlying things in his work is that energy driving all creation is coming from some source and is manifesting itself as magnetic and electrical means. But this is just my take on his work.

Too bad we won't be able to see what else he had in store.

There is no single mention about free energy or a device, its not att all what the primer field videos are about.

[boguslaw]

Very well said....Earth is just an iron ball

[Ruphus]

I've watched all 3, sad that there will not be more. I was looking forward to his explanation of how the galactic (or any) magnetic bowls are formed from nothing. He suggests no dark matter or aether but rather infinitely small matter, I suppose one could count that as the same.

I like some of what he is offering, a fractal universe, phase shifts, all things are EM waves.

But all of this has been said before.

The bowls and experiments are interesting though.

[Ein~+ein]

If you watch the videos, he shows with his device, the plasma rotating within the "static" magnetic fields. I don't know if it is due to the magnets or maybe perhaps some effect of the earth? But LaPoint seems quite convinced that it's from the magnetic fields.

I suggest you watch the rest of the videos and see what you glean from it.

I will. Regarding the rotation of the plasma, Thrive's premise is that this cyclical rotation of the field within the torus is that of all natural healthy systems and is prominently featured throughout the film. The first time I started watching the film, it looked like a bigger budget, more prime-time presentation of what the Zeitgeist films were about.

How plausible/naive do any of you think LaPoints magnetic universe theory is? Given he's already dismissed the Electric Universe theory, I'm wondering if he'll go after bigger fish next: renowned cosmologists.

[cc3996]

I am friends with Dave and thus, very familiar with his work. The Primer Fields series was done on Youtube because Dave is a visual guy and would prefer to express his theory in a visual way (it was also fun to make). He was originally going to attempt a mathematical derrivation but at the end of the day would only be doing such a paper to satisfy a group (looking to refute his work) who's opinion matters very little to him or those involved with application of this science, his actual income earning enterprises. We have a good chuckle when any supporter of the current physics dogma refers to him as "crank" or tries to invalidate what he proposes by citing a lack of math or a paper on it. There are hundreds of "papers" and volumes of math with regards to DM as a WIMP, the "spin" of "black holes", the Higgs boson and "virtual particles" as though these are real. All of which only exist in the form of mathematical equations (and will only ever exist there, no matter how many billions we spend looking for them).

There is currently a paradigm shift towards more study into magnetic/energetic interaction as it relates to cosmology because this is what creates the stable structures we observe (and thus are worthy of study). Thinking the fundamental secrets of the universe exist in energy frequencies detected for a fraction of a nanosecond after 2 protons collide, or that 75% of all matter is undetectable is where theoretical math leads anyone lazy enough to follow (when the equation is a little off, just go ahead and represent the anomally with a variable to account for it). When you can grasp that gravity doesn't maintain a cloud structure in a vacuum, or bend light by "curving spacetime" and that in a vacuum, a sphere cannot "explode" into two energetic lobes, yet leave a sphere behind, there may be hope for you.

Lastly, not one single physicist either of us has spoken with can actually say he is wrong and state a valid reason why. Just like on this forum.
Just ad hocs and citing an "ignorance "of the scientific method as far as sending his theory to the world. If he were in the "established" scientific community surely these short comings would result in expulsion, so it's a relief he is in a postition to just do his work without having to justify why it produces the results it does beyond observational success.

Primer fields

Post 13... No relevance to primer fields theory...garbage....just like your comparison above.. A better comparison would be a football player setting a world record in the 100m during drills, just because he can (kinda pisses off the athletes actually training for it but...just...cant....get ...there). But stick to YOUR scientific method...stick to squandering OTHER peoples money on snipe hunts and take your own advice, don't try to comment on science YOU know nothing about...that would be primer fields. (figured I would specify since associating "magnetic turbulence" to anything Dave is proposing clearly demonstrates a comprehension issue).

Regarding HAVING nothing to be invalidated, you have posted several times INVALIDATING what he proposes...but I'm sure there is math which qualifies this too.

"Don't try to get involved in things you know nothing about"-----I'm not the one making assumptions about an individuals motivations for making a youtube video series or scrutinizing the methodology behind it. If you actually are employed in a scientific arena, you could take the route a few other facilities have, apply what he is saying as it pertains to your particular field and see if you can falsify it, or maybe, do something useful with it....NASA is....so did these guys.

Magnetic shell provides unprecedented control of magnetic fields

Getting around the 'uncertainty principle': Physicists make first direct measurements of polarization states of light


Or you can keep posting your opinion about "pseudoscience" and advising people who don't "tow the company line" to go educate themselves in the same manner you have been...hell maybe you can bring ptolemy back to astrophyscics and repopularize leaches in medicine. Surely the "force carrier" of gravity is right on your doorstep....a little package from the WIMP fairy all neatly bound with a Higgs boson bow around it....as I said, we chuckle when one of YOU throws out the crank label.

Primer fields

Apologies Markus, I shouldn't make assumptions regarding the guy behind an internet handle.

"which is something that will never happen"... - But frequent home appendix removal does?.....

I haven't watched any of the primer fields videos since immediately after there completion, if Dave uses the term "magnetic tubulence" it could only be in reference to plasma current instabilities, turbulent eddies that form in interacting plasma currents. Or, possibly the boundary of interacting fields.

Cluster mission indicates turbulent eddies may warm the solar wind

The above article makes some questionable assumptions but shows an example of the turbulence

Approaching Solar System's Edge, Voyager Probes Detect A Foamy Sea of Magnetic Bubbles | Popular Science

Same stuctures, just larger and cooler...

And no, there is no Primer fields "program" at NASA, he was contacted by the space propulsion systems group who saw potential in the work.

Gauss' law works fine for a static magnetic dipole. In plasma currents Amperes/Faradays laws would be the more appropriate of Maxwells equations to use when trying to calculate flux/current density. The issues with plasma in space (and where the "magnetic turbulence") come into play are that the currents are continuously coupling with or purturbing each other, creating instabilities which actually maintain the currents....but calculating applicable values when they are continuously changing would be an exercise in futility.

Lastly to answer your question, I posted on this forum (first time ever posting to a forum) because I happened upon it by chance (searching for a rather funny "matrix" spoof I was told about where Neo learns about The Primer fields) and after reading the comments felt compelled to "defend" a friend....similar to how you feel comp[elled to defend the scientific method I am condemning (I referred to it as YOUR scientific method working under the assumption that you are a physicist in some capacity). The reason for the condemnation is simple, Physics stopped using the established scientific method and gradually developed a new one over the last 100 years. In the "new" method adhering to established values, laws and theorums at all costs dominate, even when observation shows that certain assumptions can no longer be made. So contrary to your statement above regarding starting from scratch...yeah you do. At which time you evaluate what is still valid (law) and what can no longer be (theory) because of observation, you don't "invent" something that fills the hole and then search for it.

Primer fields

"The "some guy" is actually a plasma physicist. Do you think he put the lab/vacuum chamber together and made the videos without applicable mathematics/ laws of force? That it all just "came together" as it is shown as a fluke? I agree turbulence is a poor choice of words in reference to magnetic fields, but the depth of theory is nowhere close to being represented by the 3 videos. Attempting to invalidate it over a poor choice of words is equivalent to saying your food tastes terrible because your fork is slightly bent.

The simplest way of stating the theory is that there is a type or multiple types of magnetism which are responsible for every astrophysical phenomenon we observe. Without EM we observe nothing.

"News to me"- Yup, like cancer to someone who doesn't know they have it. For the record I don't question the validity of any of Maxwells equations, every scientist i know(crank or not) trusts them.
Nor do I doubt the complexity of modelling plasma behaviour, but these are Daves areas of expertise. I can tell you that EFD is an incomplete model to use on plasma due to density issues in some circumstances. Only because I trust the word of the people who told me, since they have worked with plasma for many years.

Above someone inquired as to generating the shape of the fields: Apply angular momentum to the mass of any spherical magnetic dipole in which a dynamo type of movement is generating/amplifying the field. You get 2 bowl shaped fields.

Primer fields

[Allcanadian]

@cc3996
Thanks for posting that link to "The science forum", I got a real kick out of that. It kind of reminds me of the internet in that something relatively simple can take on a life of it's own over time until those involved lose sight of what is real and what is not. Thus it is no surprise that these people have come to believe that math, equations and publications are synonymous with credibility and facts.

As if a person could not find truth or think for themselves without these man-made creations which tend to be self-reinforcing building one layer on the next with little foresight. It is a shame so many smart people must go tumbling down the rabbit hole only to find it has no beginning and no end, lol.

AC