Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism. 92 pages. Free new book

[Ufopolitics]

Davis-Rawls Model Analysis...

Hello Ken,

On that great book you 'gifted' to all of Us, many thanks!...excellent, superb!
I also believed this is all possible treatments and could be the future 'restoring biological machine' for human cures, just like seen on Elysium ...absolutely!

Now and first, related to their Magnetic Model shown below...do you fully agree with it?....

[IMG][/IMG]

They wrote (and I highlighted in yellow their main configuration, as you also did and shown in grey)...:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now...if We just turn that same magnet, we have:

[IMG][/IMG]

I see this 'classification' about North turning 'Left' as South turning 'Right'...as very "RELATIVE" (Sorry I have to use -again- your very good old friend "One Stone" words)...

No, but seriously... just look at turning that same magnet, how the whole thing "coincides" using the same 'Observer' point of view.

Now We have South turning same as North original book drawing...meaning to 'our Left'...as well as North turning now as South, or towards 'Right'...

And...if We go into "Interactions" of same Model...see what happens:

[IMG][/IMG]

On the first Attract Mode or Voidance picture, no needed 'twisting of magnets is required...as everything seems ok, meaning the interaction area circled in red shows N & S spinning opposite to each others...so, this way they 'attract' right?...

BUT, when we see same magnets at Counter Voidance (Repulsion) from S-S Polarization...We see that both S-S facing each others are ALSO turning opposite to each others, same as previous voidance of N-S?...Sorry, but with all due respect for this excellent book and authors work...but this explanation about turning references does not make sense at all.

I understand that South is Sourcing while North is draiN...so from the flow point of view it would be fine...

Let's try to explain this 'Relativity" of movement from the observers point of view, when applied to a Motor as an example:

Say We have a Motor that 'Spins Left' or CCW written on its Spec's Label when terminals connected as they say there...As We all understand it 'Applies' as when looking to shaft facing to our eyes from the Driving side of Shaft....However, IF we look at rear end of Motor, facing our eyes...shaft would be spinning CW, or to the Right. Meaning, opposite to 'Main Left' Rotation, however, shaft is one piece...spinning one way only.

So, going back to a 'Magnet's' dielectric plane...it 'sucks inwards' towards a virtual counter-space 'center' while also 'spinning' or 'doing it' with a 'rotation sense'...right?...Therefore if We have Polarizations 'counter-rotating' each others...then to which one the dielectric plane would 'counter' rotate?...

See where I am getting at?...there is an obvious 'error' here...

The way I can only see this whole thing, in order to make sense...is IF both polarizations rotates as the shaft of previous example motor...meaning 'one way'...then dielectric will 'counter rotate' shaft...PLUS, if we do all possible 'Interactions'...then they will also make sense...take a look:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now, if We 'Interact' to N-S and S-S as originally...:

[IMG][/IMG]

On Voidance (attract) We see both N-S interacting polarizations turning same direction , then thinking as 'Engaging' their Vortexes just like 'Two Screw type Gears' driving towards both counterspace planes, to end up making just one at their intersection.

At S-S Counter-Voidance we see them counter rotating...they will never engage into a gearing screw following a mutual attraction, but keep repelling each others.

What do you think Ken?


Thanks in advance for your answer friend!


Regards


Ufopolitics

[tachyoncatcher]

Ah Hah!

OMG, what a dunce. Now I get it. I must have read that a dozen times, but now my brain is ready to accept it. Thanks Ken.

Randy

...which, in appearance, they dont look connected (either force / half).....but they ARE, connected in counterspace.

[TheoriaApophasis]

OMG, what a dunce. Now I get it. I must have read that a dozen times, but now my brain is ready to accept it. Thanks Ken.

Randy

human brainz dont like complex geometry , at least not picturing them in 3D in your brain.


all human critters suffer this prob.


Non-Euclidean geometry even worse still.

[ldrancer]

its called "taking the analogy too far"


its a logical fallacy identified 3000 years ago.

okokokko
i do see how humans, draw the line. but i dont see how, mother nature draws the line. when theres obviously 2 lines. im not agreeing with you or trying to in any way. you need to disagree with me. in some comprehensible way.

mother nature seems like a dot int eh middle of a single line drew by a human. pretty plain like that.
thats not mother nature drawing, a line. its 2 lines. with a mother nature put in the middle. then its 2 lines. as theres 2 arrows and drawn by a person.

my point is your not proveing a point. those lines hwere drawn by a human. its a straight line like the one above it, having 2 arrows drawn on it, pointing away from each other, and a dot put in the middle. thats a mother natre line? and the other is a human line? i can draw a human line, then like mother nature if i draw an arrow on the other end and put a dot in the middle. but its shjorter doen the other way.
so. doopeeddy doo. scooby dooby doo where are you.

that line is supposed to explain your concept. i just dont like it and want to disagree iwth it. as in i dont like concepts is my point. rather see proof. answer questions. thats how debates go. you dont like arguing. .. ud rather be right. ok. im just asking for answers. those lines, both are drawn by humans and i dont see a correleation or any difference.

[ldrancer]

human brainz dont like complex geometry , at least not picturing them in 3D in your brain.


all human critters suffer this prob.


Non-Euclidean geometry even worse still.

hang on. if this is geometry its like a triangle which is provable. your talking about a concept. its not a shape which is a thing. your talking about a concept. which isnt a thing. its a thought or.. verb. its an action.

[Ufopolitics]

Seeing it in 3D CAD...

nobody is taught this abstruse stuff in school, NOBODY

nor in college,

its no big deal.


Do you have you brain wrapped around a HYPERBOLOID? You should soak your crotch in a hot tub for about an HOUR and think DEEP about it while picturing a HYPERBOLOID








A magnet has no center, its FI (field incommensurability), and its "center" cannot be "cut out", or separated , etc etc.





apply this picture to the Hyperboloid in your mind...., then 'meditate' on the 'problem' of polarity, space , counterspace....

Another way to see it...

[IMG][/IMG]

A line is drawn originating from 0,0,0 following two directions, based on coordinates in green dotted lines on both sides of quadrant. This is like using two pens, one blue, one red and coming from same common point and flowing apart at 180º.
Using that 0,0,0 center as the 'pivot point' then 'grabbing' both lines ends by blue-red arrows, if we 'spin' line following the green dotted Circles A & A' and directions shown on magenta and light blue arrows within circles, leaving a 'trace' behind...we will be 'REVOLVING' a Hyperboloid 3D Volume.

Anyone familiar with CAD Software knows what a 'revolve' surface function is...based on anything including a line, a curve or a closed, open, flat or 3D polygon.

Now, Ken, going back to my previous post...say the blue end of line is the Polarized North...as Red end is South...revolving this way...it would be following my explanation on "One Way Spin"...except that shaft is not following a 'perfectly vertical' spin...but, still, North is turning CCW, while South is turning CW...(This is looking at each arrow separately, and aiming at screen obviously) And the WHOLE line (Red+Blue ends) is turning ONLY in ONE Direction.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[ldrancer]

nope nope nope nope nope. its like why did after seeing a 3d cube did the stupid quiz come out which side of the dumb glass is the fly on? your not eve making sense trying to draw this thing to spin everybody up to attempt to call everyone dumb.

your not drawing a straight line. its like its supposed to be the game of dont cross the line, or previous point, but you guys do it over and over again. as i said, before, make an engine out of it. if its drawable.. and a real geometric shapek, then its definately freaking craftable and then there boom you got your vroom vroom engine.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hello Ken,
Now and first, related to their Magnetic Model shown below...do you fully agree with it?....
Ufopolitics

NOPE, its kinda generally accurate.

Polarity doesn’t imply opposites as in the case of magnetism or the (coherent mass we call) magnet….., rather the INVERSE of counterspace, ie the creation of SPACE and ANTINOMIES, there is only one antinomy, the inverse of counterspace.

"current science" parrots the BS that a magnet "has poles", either qualitatively or quantitatively, or both. But no such nonsense exists.

Duality, or polarity as per magnetism or the MACRO model of same in the magnet is a conceptual reification that there "ARE 2 INVERSE X-ENTITIES (poles)".



Both "poles" are moving in the SAME direction with respect to the center, and INVERSE with respect to each other , just typical HYPERBOLOID MIRROR SYMMETRY


ALL geometry is PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY

make a 'point' (bad term really, since even a point is geometric.) ALL GEOMETRY begins "there" (noWHERE , really).


The dielectric inertial plane of any magnet:
1. NO MEASURE
2. NO POSSIBILITY TO 'CUT IT OUT', SEPARATE IT
3. INDIVISIBLE AND INCOMMENSURATE (learn what that word means)



You can slice a magnet a 100000000000000 times vertically, or parallel to 'polarity',......and there is no separation of "poles"
......you just end up with 1000000000000000 new magnets EACH WITH THEIR OWN "N and S 'poles' "

Hello Ken,
Therefore if We have Polarizations 'counter-rotating' each others...then to which one the dielectric plane would 'counter' rotate?...
Ufopolitics

There is no polarity, only Natures "line" which is the loss of inertia (= FORCE AND MOTION) which is inverse to counterspace.

the dielectric inertial plane is "counter/inverse" to BOTH

but youre leaving out also gyromagnetic precession and also there is a phase shift in the poles, rarefied on the N, and compressed on the S.


Countless biological experiments and the ferrocell prove this without any question


likewise, this PHASE SHIFT is necessitated to exist.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Another way to see it...
Now, Ken, going back to my previous post...say the blue end of line is the Polarized North...as Red end is South...revolving this way...it would be following my explanation on "One Way Spin"...except that shaft is not following a 'perfectly vertical' spin...but, still, North is turning CCW, while South is turning CW...(This is looking at each arrow separately, and aiming at screen obviously) And the WHOLE line (Red+Blue ends) is turning ONLY in ONE Direction.
Ufopolitics

your picture, your empirical model leaves out:


the magneto-dielectric hyperboloid is not 'connected lines' , but the "two sheet model hyperboloid"

it leaves out precessional gyromagnetic torque

it leaves out the necessitated phase shift that most exist inherent to all forces and spatial divergences.


Each "pole" is (use your hands to demo this to yourself) moving AS MIRROR to each one respectively, inverse to each other but the SAME with respect to the "center".


Compounded (multiple 'lines') divergent (spatial) NATURAL (natures) LINES


likewise a reciprocating hyperboloid creates a hypotrochoid, ..........the necessitated field force (=magnetism) pressure mediation seen from a magnet as i predicted ,..... and later discovered under the FERROCELL.



The hyperboloid IS NATURES "line"..........remember what "her" LINE IS.



now COMPOUND IT,..... inverse to counterspace is space,...... and each "pole" is moving inverse respective to the other, but each moving the same direction with respect to the "center".


of course natures hyperboloid is a perfect "point" at the center, unlike this picture below (the white string picture):


A true magnetic hyperboloid is a "TWO SHEET MODEL HYPERBOLOID"

which, in appearance, they dont look connected (either force / half).....but they ARE, connected in counterspace




**** Amazingly in seeing same, ...in bringing two magnets together ...("attraction" , a bs ideation!, rather dielectric voidance) ..... you can see TWO HALVES of the hyperboloids creating a SPHERE, ............and that sphere rapidly SHRINKING ;D


That crafty *****, Mother nature, I finally figured out how her magnet works. ;D


ROFL








Likewise, the Magneto-dielectric hyperboloid is NOTHING other than the POINCARE' DISK MODEL in necessitated mirror "polarity" (bad word)


The reciprocating hyperboloid (from one spatial side to the other) "draws out" the Hypotrochoid, it MUST as dictated by the nature of force and motion curvilinear assimilation to the net-0 INERTIAL PLANE

[Dog-One]

That crafty *****, Mother nature, I finally figured out how her magnet works. ;D

So all those angles you calculated previously exactly match the projections?

If so, then yeah, you nailed it Ken.

[ldrancer]

i think you're grabbing at straws in the dark. you understand how a mirror works?
what i expect next with your responses is, inverse colors

[Ufopolitics]

your picture, your empirical model leaves out:


the magneto-dielectric hyperboloid is not 'connected lines' , but the "two sheet model hyperboloid"

Well Ken, that picture was based on the quoted line picture drawn by nature...

apply this picture to the Hyperboloid in your mind...., then 'meditate' on the 'problem' of polarity, space , counterspace....

it leaves out precessional gyromagnetic torque

it leaves out the necessitated phase shift that most exist inherent to all forces and spatial divergences.

Could we please go "by steps" just like teaching little kids......so please could you be patient enough with Us?...

Each "pole" is (use your hands to demo this to yourself) moving AS MIRROR to each one respectively, inverse to each other but the SAME with respect to the "center".

Ok, the only way to do that (rotating inverse related to each others and BOTH following SAME Rotation related to Center)... is by "OFF MAIN CENTER" Curves generating the two surfaces Hyperboloid, (rotating around their own axis) while ORBITING or TRANSLATING around center axis...

Compounded (multiple 'lines') divergent (spatial) NATURAL (natures) LINES


likewise a reciprocating hyperboloid creates a hypotrochoid, ..........the necessitated field force (=magnetism) pressure mediation seen from a magnet as i predicted ,..... and later discovered under the FERROCELL.



The hyperboloid IS NATURES "line"..........remember what "her" LINE IS.



now COMPOUND IT,..... inverse to counterspace is space,...... and each "pole" is moving inverse respective to the other, but each moving the same direction with respect to the "center".

Before 'compounding it' ...it must be understood as single projections, from single lines or curves...pls, let me quote you again part by part:

...each "pole" is moving inverse respective to the other...

Sentence above is 'too general'...

1-Are each pole counter rotating between them based on an inline dual axis?
2-Or are they rotating per single axis and seen from each independent ends?

In order to understand "moving inverse to the other"

Then:

...but each (pole) moving the same direction with respect to the "center".

In my understanding...it would not be possible to do that Ken...either both #1 or #2 above.

"Poles" can not rotate counter to each other, then Both("unified" in one single movement) to be moving same direction as center.

of course natures hyperboloid is a perfect "point" at the center, unlike this picture below (the white string picture):


A true magnetic hyperboloid is a "TWO SHEET MODEL HYPERBOLOID"

which, in appearance, they dont look connected (either force / half).....but they ARE, connected in counterspace




**** Amazingly in seeing same, ...in bringing two magnets together ...("attraction" , a bs ideation!, rather dielectric voidance) ..... you can see TWO HALVES of the hyperboloids creating a SPHERE, ............and that sphere rapidly SHRINKING ;D


That crafty *****, Mother nature, I finally figured out how her magnet works. ;D


ROFL

************************************************** ************************************************** *************

Ok, Ken, that picture above is based on CENTERED Curves forming the Hyperboloid surfaces...meaning, ROTATING along the Z Axis

Likewise, the Magneto-dielectric hyperboloid is NOTHING other than the POINCARE' DISK MODEL in necessitated mirror "polarity" (bad word)


The reciprocating hyperboloid (from one spatial side to the other) "draws out" the Hypotrochoid, it MUST as dictated by the nature of force and motion curvilinear assimilation to the net-0 INERTIAL PLANE

Now, above are Two Curves, upper and lower, both OFF MAIN (0) CENTER, making a projection above disc surface in red...and, if you revolve those two curves, either by center axis (0)...or by their own center ...they will NEVER generate that smooth green Hyperboloid Surface.

Ken, for me it is not a problem, nor a limitation to build ANY Model I want into an animated 3D Color Film...BUT, We must agree in the basic points.

According to the Poincaré Disc and Sphere, plus drawings above applying the two surfaces Hyperboloid...plus seen the projections on disc related to center...then it is exactly what I was talking before...

The Two Curves that "Sweep" or REVOLVE the Two Hyperboloid Surfaces...MUST BE AWAY, OFF THE WHOLE GEOMETRY CENTER from all shown "aligned" 3D Main Volumes which are: Sphere, Disc and all lines revolving into single sheet Hyperboloid.

But then...IF You sweep/revolve an Off center curve, (like drawn above) you will never obtain that 'smooth' surface shown there from the two hyperboloid surfaces...it would be a 'half donut shape'...or an indented center form.

Below is the animated video of sweeping Two type of Hiperboloids...One and Two Surfaces, based on lines and curves...and am talking simple ones rotating based on single axis...not applying the Poincaré Discs or sphere projections off center...however, I will do them as well.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6XWxj0dTaI&feature=youtu.be[/VIDEO]

Thanks Ken for your great patience with me here...as well as to others trying to understand all this.

Take care


Ufopolitics

[TheoriaApophasis]

Ok, the only way to do that (rotating inverse related to each others and BOTH following SAME Rotation related to Center)... is by "OFF MAIN CENTER" Curves generating the two surfaces Hyperboloid, (rotating around their own axis) while ORBITING or TRANSLATING around center axis...

The compounded line (the hyperboloid) divergence PRECEDES the sphere, of course.

youre talking about after the fact as per orbiting, likewise, the divergent centrifugal to centripetal force projections are (IN FULL) ellipses

did you see this video yet??>>>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07v_dcg14j0

Now, above are Two Curves, upper and lower, both OFF MAIN (0) CENTER

That VERY HASTY DIAGRAM shouldnt be taken so literally, i just inverted 2 disk models,.......youre taking it as 100% accurate, I only meant it representationally.

Thanks Ken for your great patience with me here...as well as to others trying to understand all this.

I had to pound my skull in over ages to see the WHOLE picture and you want to relate all of that?

thats one hellish task

...but each (pole) moving the same direction with respect to the "center".
In my understanding...it would not be possible to do that Ken...either both #1 or #2 above.

the divergent magnetic force hyperboloid cannot exist any other way.

A spatial (=polarity) mirror is always ONE inverse to the OTHER

as relational to the "mirror" (sic) itself, both are going likewise identically.

...they will NEVER generate that smooth green Hyperboloid Surface.

its not a static hyperboloid, its force and motion definitionally, seeking the LOWEST counterspatial "sink" (like water "looking" for a hole........LOL).
A static GEOMETRIC hyperboloid is only half the picture, and only the FIRST half,

you forget that the inverse side is likewise reciprocating one upon the other, .......and add gyromagnetic precession, you have a -----


Reciprocating precessional hyperboloid (YEAH, TRY PICTURING THAT BABY)


which is why you see the hypotrochoid pattern on either 'pole'.

.But then...IF You sweep/revolve an Off center curve, (like drawn above) you will never obtain that 'smooth' surface shown there from the two hyperboloid surfaces...it would be a 'half donut shape'...or an indented center form.

If you were talking about the magnetic field of one atom or molecule, then fine.

But a magnet is definitionally a COHERENT polarized mass.

Gryomagnetic precession in the coherent mass likewise amplifies the phase shift of same.


It is off center, by .3819

.The Two Curves that "Sweep" or REVOLVE the Two Hyperboloid Surfaces

The magnetic divergence doensnt obviously END at the 2 curves, what is AS MEANT is that the very FIRST geometric projection of the loss of inertia (= MAGNETISM) is a hyperboloid, but the CURVES CONTINUE ON to the other side, and mediate their own force divergences , hence the hypotrochoid.


you begin with the Spatial-counterspatial- Spatial ("pole" inerital plane "pole").......in which case you have the onset hyperboloid

THEN add precession........

THEN add reciprocation.......


Then you end up with a field pressure geometry thats about 99.99999999999999% impossible to explain

[Ufopolitics]

The compounded line (the hyperboloid) divergence PRECEDES the sphere, of course.

youre talking about after the fact as per orbiting, likewise, the divergent centrifugal to centripetal force projections are (IN FULL) ellipses

did you see this video yet??>>>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07v_dcg14j0

Yes, I did see it, nice...I have been making that model as well in 3D, but as you did it on the main book designs, meaning, not 'exactly' as an sphere:

[IMG][/IMG]

So, when looking from above (Upper View) we have a similar pattern:

[IMG][/IMG]

I had to pound my skull in over ages to see the WHOLE picture and you want to relate all of that?

thats one hellish task

Well, let's put it this way Ken, very seriously speaking now...

Let's say that thanks to your excellent work, summed to all prior developments I have conducted before, also for many years.... I have made an 'Epic' Discovery...something that would be like SCIence FIction to anyone knowledgeable in the fields...but, I need to "understand" the main basic Spectrum to better explain it in my Open Source Science disclosure papers...in order not to hide absolutely anything...get it?

Now, I clearly understand how it works (my discovery)...but there are some 'discrepancies' when it comes to explaining -in detail- this Vortexes of Energy from Magnetic Fields.

All this work you have put together here...seems like SCIFI or even unbelievable to many people...but at the same token...I say that all we have studied that INVOLVES Magnetic Fields...would have to be re-written again...as the way we understood all this taught concepts is completely WRONG in 180º...

the divergent magnetic force hyperboloid cannot exist any other way.

A spatial (=polarity) mirror is always ONE inverse to the OTHER

as relational to the "mirror" (sic) itself, both are going likewise identically.

Yes, I got that, thanks!

its not a static hyperboloid, its force and motion definitionally, seeing the LOWEST counterspatial "sink" (like water "looking" for a hole........LOL).
A static GEOMETRIC hyperboloid is only half the picture,

I also understand it is NOT a static, nor 'solid' hyperboloid...as there are no lines, nor curves either...They are all "Traces" left behind from very fast traveling particles detected by all this new inventions and discoveries, like the ferrocell, CRT...and Magnetic Lenses, etc.

So, actually, the 'Traces' that configure all this 3D volumetric shapes are not moving at all...

you forget that the inverse side is likewise reciprocating one upon the other, .......and add gyromagnetic precession, you have a -----


Reciprocating precessional hyperboloid (YEAH, TRY PICTURING THAT BABY)


which is why you see the hypotrochoid pattern on either 'pole'.

I do...I could see some...but it is too bright...


[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

If you were talking about the magnetic field of one atom or molecule, then fine.

But a magnet is definitionally a COHERENT polarized mass.

Gryomagnetic precession in the coherent mass likewise amplifies the phase shift of same.


It is off center, by .3819

Ok, so the 'off center' is almost nothing (0.3819=0.4)...so, not like shown on Poincaré projection diagrams...

Take care Ken, and thanks.


Ufopolitics

[TheoriaApophasis]

All this work you have put together here...seems like SCIFI or even unbelievable to many people...but at the same token...I say that all we have studied that INVOLVES Magnetic Fields...would have to be re-written again...as the way we understood all this taught concepts is completely WRONG in 180º...
Ufopolitics

too true, indeed yes.


and i did read all you wrote, and agree 100% of the rest of same





You made those computer generated pics? !!!


Absolutely Fu*cking AWESOME STUFF !!