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

[Hrothgar]

Trouble in paradise

I can't finish the downloads the large one stops at 13.4meg and the small one stops at 12meg. they both act as though they have completed by dropping the .part file.

[TheoriaApophasis]

I can't finish the downloads the large one stops at 13.4meg and the small one stops at 12meg. they both act as though they have completed by dropping the .part file.

The issue is at YOUR end.

Do NOT OPEN the link, right click then "save link as"


Just tested BOTH for download a second ago.................., all works fine.

OTHER OPTION is a torrent download of the book here:

http://kickass.to/uncovering-the-mis...-t9272462.html


YET ANOTHER option is download from archive.org here:

https://ia902502.us.archive.org/31/i...etismsmall.pdf

[wattsup]

@TheoriaApophasis

I sent you a PM.

Thanks.

wattsup

[ewizard]

TheoriaApophasis, Thanks again for all your work on this and the additional info. So far everyone I've seen has had some trouble downloading it (talk on another forum). I tried it myself and it erred out many times but with the browser I use (opera) I was able to 'resume' it each time until it finished. So if people can't get it with their current browser grab opera (best browser IMO - been using it over 20 years!) from Opera browser - The alternative web browser - Download free and give it a go. If it stops just click on the downloads tab and then right click on the download and choose 'Resume'.

Thanks for your response to my first post but I think I missed an answer in there. Just asking for your opinion : Do you think one can make a free energy generator based on magnets?

[TheoriaApophasis]

TheoriaApophasis, Thanks again for all your work on this and the additional info. So far everyone I've seen has had some trouble downloading it (talk on another forum). I tried it myself and it erred out many times but with the browser I use (opera) I was able to 'resume' it each time until it finished. So if people can't get it with their current browser grab opera (best browser IMO - been using it over 20 years!) from Opera browser - The alternative web browser - Download free and give it a go. If it stops just click on the downloads tab and then right click on the download and choose 'Resume'.

Thanks for your response to my first post but I think I missed an answer in there. Just asking for your opinion : Do you think one can make a free energy generator based on magnets?

I have called 2 other contacts.......they report downloading both links without any trouble.


Just tested BOTH for download a second ago (yet again)................., all works fine.

OTHER OPTION is a torrent download of the book here:

http://kickass.to/uncovering-the-mis...-t9272462.html


YET ANOTHER option is download from archive.org here:

https://ia902502.us.archive.org/31/i...etismsmall.pdf

I have downloaded both links remotely off Safari, Firefox and Chrome without any issue.

do NOT OPEN the links, rather "right click" and "save link as"

I have much experience with PDF, and this is always the recommended methodology.



~~~~~~~ Just asking for your opinion : Do you think one can make a free energy generator based on magnets?


Magnetism being a spatial polarized radiation of either electricity in termination, or the inter-atomic volume from proton spin, one of the few plausible methods of 'extracting' movement would be a centrifugal capture supra-diamagnetic device.

Contrary to "nature abhors a vacuum" the case is that "nature abhors pressure gradients" ...

ultimately meaning that, as is currently the case, one requires a prime mover of a polarized field against a dielectric barrier = electrification. Be that wind, nuclear, etc etc.


There is ONE option which needs to be explored that a ratio of 1 to Phi counter-precession at an input of 1 with a resultant output of (at or near) Phi (1.618033) is possible from magnets.

Such a device would only require a small input of counter-precession to the centrifugal field yielding ~1.5-~1.6X output.

So, in short, no. But in specific YES, knowing how to create precession (and therefore movement) at a rate much greater than the input counter-precession, it is possible.

Other possibilities, logically so, exist, but are not known (well, a few are but need to be tested).


The premise for the article was understanding the nature of same, rather than any premise for free energy extraction.


Some people focus on the "WHAT"......... I would let others focus on the "HOW (to use this information to......)".

[Hrothgar]

Still reading

I'm up to page 91 and have noticed 2 errors. on page 69 the left most frame depicts a spiral vortex that is counter to your vortex description as it will sync in "N to N", "N to S" and "S to S". I altered the picture below to this to more accurately show compatible / incompatible vector.

Page 91 has a reference to ether as air as you have mentioned before but it has no quotes.

[Hrothgar]

I posted the file on Amule

I posted the 14meg version on Amule.TheoriaApophasis - Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism

[Bob Smith]

Here's a trick that might help when the download stops. For me, once the doc started downloading, I went to page one and then hit the bottom button on the page to scroll to the end of the doc. Each time it stopped, I scrolled back about 5 pages or so, and it re-started.

My computer crashed a few days ago due to another problem, so I'll have to download it again at some point.

Again, TheoA, thank you for your generosity. I'll put in a payment as soon as I get my computer back and can download it again.
Bob

[Hrothgar]

finished skimming

On page 97 you ended the sentence centrifugally when I believe centrifugal may have been better grammatically.

A good read, except for all the angst. I hope you can see my point on the following sentences. Written word is not speech, as such it leaves emotional subtext almost entirely for the reader to determine. That said, you overtly insult and ridicule the seekers of knowledge for going to the shiniest beacons of "truth" which is a good portion of the audience you should be aiming your efforts to enlightening not bashing. You also bash early scientific minds for winning a popularity contest. Truth is only recognized when it is convenient or valuable to do so. Example Einstein didn't undo Tesla, J.P. Morgan did. Tesla also lost to himself, his AC power provided a tool of profit so grand that by the time he even thought of wardencliff it was too late. Einstein and the rest gave PRACTICAL understanding of manipulation, as such not truth but profitable. Your notable judgement of others leaves readers open to negative assumption of your personality which detracts from the truth presented. other than that cheers

[TheoriaApophasis]

I'm up to page 91 and have noticed 2 errors. on page 69 the left most frame depicts a spiral vortex that is counter to your vortex description as it will sync in "N to N", "N to S" and "S to S". I altered the picture below to this to more accurately show compatible / incompatible vector.
Page 91 has a reference to ether as air as you have mentioned before but it has no quotes.

No, it is that a 2D representation of a moving double reciprocating vortex is a near impossibility, that "interior view" is meant to show ONLY the dielectric inertial planes relative position to the double conjugating centrifugal and centripetal vortex.

You are correct that that VERY limited image is not the correct magnetic vortex accurately represented in 20+ other diagrams in the work.......however that is on purpose in intent; it is merely meant to demo the relative location of the inertial plane.

There is no "spiral (singular) vortex" in or OF any "magnet", that is why you incorrectly consider that very limited image as "incompatible"

There is 1. circular reciprocation both centrifugal then centripetal 2. magneto-dielectric field-precession (explained in detail) 3. radial centripetal inertial plane as the 'driver' of this conjugate system


Its rather that the image is (that one only) extremely limited.

diagrams focus in on certain aspects, and NOT every diagram illuminates everything going on AT ONCE. Doing same would be, logically, very difficult.
However all diagrams collectively paint the picture in full.

You misunderstand the quote on page 91... it is:
however there is “air” in the atomic ‘balloon’, and
that air is a conjugate pair of dielectric

This is an attack on the GR and QM establishment which claims 99.99999999999% of an atom is "empty, is nothing".


I only make an allusion to the "balloon model" OF THE ATOM in their senseless premise as being a "balloon that has no air" in it.

AS SUCH, i was not referring to the Ether directly or specifically, in that quote, rather to the magneto-dielectric volume in the inter-atomic as mediating and mediator of discharges and atomic orbital geometries as well as the "felly volume" of the precessing and charging nucleus.





Page 97 does contain an incomplete thought-sentence. Kinds regards in pointing out that error. I have fixed same. Always thinking 10 steps ahead has disadvantages in writing, a flaw that Plotinus had as well.

Kinds regards for pointing out that necessary correction where a thought was left 'dangling'.

Lux et Veritas

[TheoriaApophasis]

Here's a trick that might help when the download stops. For me, once the doc started downloading, I went to page one and then hit the bottom button on the page to scroll to the end of the doc. Each time it stopped, I scrolled back about 5 pages or so, and it re-started.

Bob

Kind regards Bob, having and working with PDF now for countless years, the trick of ANY sizable PDF download is to NEVER click on the link rather..

"right click" then "save link as"

however better options exist here:

OTHER OPTION is a torrent download of the book here:

http://kickass.to/uncovering-the-mis...-t9272462.html


YET ANOTHER option is download from archive.org here:

https://ia902502.us.archive.org/31/i...etismsmall.pdf



I have other PDF works that are 1.2 Gigabyte PDF files, and to even dare think of opening them online is 100% impossible regardless of ones www connection. Always "save link as", never open them.


Kinds regards to you for same, Peace.


Lux et Veritas

[Bob Smith]

Thanks TheoA,
I'll save it next time that way.

Phos aletheia
Bob

[abdlquadri]

thanks

Thanks alot.

[Bob Smith]

Source: TA in http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post260670
Space has NO ENERGY, Space has never done anything.

This notion that space is "something" or DOES SOMETHING is a mental brain wasting disease of Relativity and the Cult of Quantum

Space is an attribute of a field, to speak of "action/force" IN space, is only the wrong way of saying "the FIELD BOUNDARY..........did X"

There is space IN a field, but there is no field IN SPACE.

When you speak of 'space energy', you're only reifying field energy

I have nearly 100 pages to write on this fact, with mathematical proofs.

There is only ONE DIMENSION of Space
• Space raised to the positive exponent is simply called space (acre).
• Space raised to the negative exponent is called counter-space (per sq.
centimeter).

TA, looking forward to reading your book, particularly in light of these comments. I don't know whether you'd subscribe to them, but your stance vis a vis QM and Special Relativity seems consistent with what I've seen in the work of Robert Sungenis (anti-Copernican), with which I find myself sympathetic.

I couldn't help but see your logic in describing the aether or Stiffler's spatio-temporal lattice simply as field. It would seem to me that in this way, we have one pervasive energetic reality, perhaps with different gradations and expressions. Again, looking forward to reading what you have to say.
Bob

[TheoriaApophasis]

TA, looking forward to reading your book, particularly in light of these comments. I don't know whether you'd subscribe to them, but your stance vis a vis QM and Special Relativity seems consistent with what I've seen in the work of Robert Sungenis (anti-Copernican), with which I find myself sympathetic.

I will have a 3rd edition out in less than a month. Afterwords there are maybe 40+ pages to add with math and some finer more 'dry' points.


Two quotes from Dollard with 'corrections' (so to say) in parenthesis:

There is only ONE DIMENSION of Space *(within a field)
• Space *(CENTRIFUGAL FIELD) raised to the positive exponent is simply called space (acre).
• Space raised to the negative exponent is called counter-space *(CENTRIPETAL FIELD) (per sq.
centimeter).


Hence we have FOUR primary dimensions in electrical engineering. These are:
1) Time *(FIELD FLUX VARIATION...“OVER TIME”)
2) Space .....*(FIELD BARRIER, Ether pressure graidents)
3) Dielectricity
4) Magnetism

We can of course give definition TO space, but only as is meant an attribute WITHIN a field, AS a product of a field.

A field containing space is moving at a rate of change of the field as measured BY its attribute, space.


To speak otherwise is like saying There is light (field) expanding into/within illumination (nonsensical). Rather illumination is an attribute co-principle to and as light

Light,/EM , like magnetism itself being a radiation is expanding with its attributional 'field of illumination (space)'. We say we are 'in an illuminated space', when the proper causation would be that we are 'standing within the space of illumination (field)'

where ε0 is the permittivity of space, and μ0 is the permeability of space. Since none of the four Maxwell’s equations is defined to be a causal relation, and since each of these equations connects quantities simultaneous in time, none of these equations represents a causal relation. That is, ∇ · D is not a consequence of ρ (and vice versa),∇ Ĺ~E is not a consequence of ∂B/∂t (and vice versa), and∇ Ĺ~H is not a consequence of J + ∂D/∂t (and vice versa). Thus, Maxwell’s equations, even though they are basic electromagnetic equations (since most electromagnetic relations are derivable from them), do not depict cause-and-effect relations between electromagnetic reactions



I have about 100 pages to write on this WITH mathematical proofs, most of which come from OLEG JEFIMENKO himself. Too bad he died not too long ago.

How did I 'discover' that there are no fields in space? ....I came across countless discoveries along the road, and they all pointed at one unknown point, all of them pointing at a place I had never looked, I wasn't even looking for!,..... finally so many pointing fingers could not be ignored. There is no space outside of a field. It is impossible. Likewise therefore no time. Likewise therefore no inductions. Space is a property of a field, an attribute, but there are none, and never has there ever appeared ‘a field within ‘existing space’ ', because space is the effect, not the "medium" into which there is field expansion.

As is typical of GR and QM, they have been looking at the horses ass, rather than the in the horses mouth. When a field is present, then so too space, but not "a field expanding, contracting, interacting IN SPACE".

GR and QM have it backwards (as usual), they have reified SPACE as a 'thing' that 'does things'. Space has done nothing, never has done anything (as a principle or autonomous entity, since definitionally it has no such existence).


Us crazy humans cannot think this way since the entire world we live in is countless endless ocean of fields overlapping fields overlapping fields etc. Namely also, of course, since all matter itself are trillions of spheres of magneto-dielectric 'bubbles' in temporary equilibrium.


.....likewise GR and QM dismiss 'fields' as a principle of space (rather than a modality of the Ether/Aether).
To reify space is like saying "love attracts a rock".


There IS instant action at a distance regarding fields, because space-time does NOT exist outside of a field, space is effect WITHIN a field.

A field CANNOT,NEVER HAS terminated in space. Space is IN a field, but not the inverse.

Counter-voidance is spatial compression, or what the commoner calls "magnetic repulsion" is spatial compression. Of course these are polarized Ether-fields, but what is being compressed is space itself, as given definition by polarized field gradients at maximum counter-voidance ('repulsion').

As even Dollard admits, Ether always seeks self-voidance, ALWAYS, IN counterspace.



If, as is logically necessitated, space is merely an attribute of a field, then are we splitting hairs by saying someone is moving potato chips rather than moving french fries, since both are modalities of a POTATO. LOL.
They say specificity is divinity, and the clearer the better I suppose.


All radiation is spatial, all magnetism IS definitionally of course, pure termination of electricity, but always attributional TO a subject. Magnetism itself has no autonomous existence like dielectricty.
TEM, magnetism OF a mass "X", etc. Magnetism as co-principle of the universe, unlike dielectricity, cannot , does not exist as 'an island unto itself' Polarization OF magnetism IN/OF X, and thru X

.......This also explains Dollard many mention repeatedly of (NASA) seeing ONLY the sun and the earth FAR outside the field of the earth....but no stars.
No light far outside of earth, because no field = no space = no induction

Magnet is of course polarized, electrification isn’t caused by the magnetic field against a dielectric, BUT the moving space WITHIN that polarized field of the magnet against the dielectric that is causing electrification. People think the field is causing electrification, rather it’s the moving space causing inertial plane torque. Space has only one dimension as within a field, that space is moving (as meant WITHIN a field) is how energy is created, but moving space WITHIN a field. Spatial displacement against an inertial plane causes its torque/breaking. The limit of space is just the boundary-plane of ANY field.

We think of fields as the "breaks" upon the dielectric inertial plane which creates 'dielectric friction' which = electrification, but in speaking in the SAME WAY we accurately state that "space as immediate attribute TO any field is the barrier which causes electrification", we are literally sweeping the attribute of a polarized field, that being SPACE, against a dielectric causing electrification, rather than the interaction of fields, we have their attributes influencing conjugate fields (mag on dielectric fields etc.)


This of course is , almost, one of those "chicken or the egg" situations, but still all math and evidence points to the Space itself OF a field, rather than the field itself. Namely, ALL fields ARE Ether-modalities by definition, logically and reductively so!

Convergent fields (conterspatial) and divergent fields ('spatial', or polarized)

A space (as attribute to a polarized field) sweeping against a counterspace-barrier = Planck / Electrification.

This "NO Causation" (as per fields, since there is no field in space , rather only the inverse) feature is part of a couple of books by
OLEG JEFIMENKO

BUT he NEVER makes the the connection between fields and space!!!! Arggh!
He has the math, he points out the mystery, but he MISSES the connection!!

He states:
It is traditionally asserted that, according to Maxwell’s equation (3), a changing magnetic field produces an electric field (‘Faraday induction’) and that, according to Maxwell’s equation (4), a changing electric field produces a magnetic field (‘Maxwell induction’). The very useful and successful method of calculating induced voltage (emf) in terms of changing magnetic
flux appears to support the reality of Faraday induction. And the existence of electromagnetic waves appears to support the reality of both Faraday induction and Maxwell induction. Note, however, that as explained in section 1, Maxwell’s equation (3), which is usually considered as depicting Faraday induction, does not represent a cause-and-effect relation because in this equation the electric and the magnetic field is evaluated for the same moment of time. Note also that in electromagnetic waves electric and magnetic fields are in phase, that is, simultaneous in time, and hence, according to the principle of causality (which states that the cause always
precedes its effect), the two fields cannot cause each other (by the principle of causality, the fields should be out of phase if they create each other).

And there is one more fact that supports the conclusion that what we call ‘electromagnetic induction’ is not the creation of one of the two fields by the other. In the covariant formulation of electrodynamics, electric and magnetic fields appear as components of one single entity— the electromagnetic field tensor (dielectric). Quite clearly, a component of a tensor cannot be a cause of another component of the same tensor, just like a component of a vector cannot be a cause of another component of the same vector.

Therefore, since it is impossible to interpret both the electric and the magnetic field as relativistic effects, one must conclude that neither field is a relativistic effect.


MINE:
This is why the insane fools of GR and QM (Or as Dollard calls it "Quantum Mysticism")have created a "mystical" effect precedes cause nonsense. They dont grasp that time and space are attributional to fields and field interactions, and they have no existence autonomous OF or from fields themselves.

Ive always called it the "Cult of Quantum"





OLEG JEFIMENKO

jefimenko
(October 14, 1922, Kharkiv, Ukraine - May 14, 2009, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA) - physicist and Professor Emeritus at West Virginia University.

Biography
He received his Ph.D. at the University of Oregon (1956).In 1956, he was awarded the Sigma Xi Prize. In 1971 and 1973, he won awards in the AAPT Apparatus Competition. Jefimenko has constructed and operated electrostatic generators run by atmospheric electricity.