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

[TheoriaApophasis]

what is the laser pic above and why do the poles switch colors ?

The laser pics are regarding a device undergoing patent seeking, it has multiple channels, that was ONE.
I cannot/will not at this time explain THAT device



Why the poles are diff. colors and why the center is ALL THREE (RGB = white)

is explained here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC0GznhY7fk

[d3x0r]

Looks to me like the LEDs are biased higher/lower on one side vs the other... so on one side the red shows through better, and the other green shows better. Really looks more like a left-right phenomenon instead of a north/south attribute.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Looks to me like the LEDs are biased higher/lower on one side vs the other... so on one side the red shows through better, and the other green shows better. Really looks more like a left-right phenomenon instead of a north/south attribute.

Using 2 diff lenses, and rotating the LEDS around the lens.


Same thing


ROTATING THE MAGNET ENDLESSLY, .....same thing.


all the same, same same.



Its hyper-logical, phase shift deflection from INVERSE CW and CCW spin

AND dielectric attraction of ALL RGB at the dielectric inertial plane.

(especially BLUE, for obvious reasons as explained)

[thx1138]

Theo, any thoughts on the source of what is commonly called "polarity" in dielectricity? Or is polarity an inherent attribute? Or did I miss something in one of your documents? If so, which one?

[TheoriaApophasis]

Theo, any thoughts on the source of what is commonly called "polarity" in dielectricity? Or is polarity an inherent attribute? Or did I miss something in one of your documents? If so, which one?

polarity = radiation = creation of SPACE


a NECESSITATED (Greek: ananke) attribute.......charge, discharge, divergent , convergent.


Mother called, she said she never created a "negative charge" only discharge.


Hot ice
Pregnant baby
negative charge
fast turtle.


etc etc ROFL


Dilelectricity has no polarity, only the termination of this charge (discharge) is a diff. modality of the Ether and becomes curvilinear (=polarized).


The Ether (Aether) is the Ether is the Ether.




This is also why Tesla spanked Einstein for reifying SPACE as "something that does things" He said it was impossible, and he was right.

Space is an attribute, and posterior to, ALL radiative fields.


Obviously, what makes mass/matter MASSIVE (= spatial) is ONLY magnetism.

This is why Faraday called (and JJ Thomson) magnetism the "dielectric FIELD"


Magnetism is radiation, is the discharge.

Also why its incorrect to say Electricity terminates INTO magnetism., rather correctly "electricity terminates AS magnetism"

Electricity (not dielectricity) is a combo of dielectricity AND magnetism (this is of course a HARD COLD fact)...Ergo, when electricity is terminating, it is losing its dielectric component and hence is then magnetism/ magnetization.


I will write on this much more in the 3rd edition.

[sadang]

Hi Ken,

I have to study again what really light is according to your interpretation. Impressive images from laser device. They looks very much as solar flares. However, all these 2D images of a 3D geometry and dymanics require a very good imagination and spatial view ability. Plus a new view of light and magnetism, according to your theory. Otherwise everything is meaningless.

One ideea that crosses my mind now, to see geometrically all three components of a magnet, 360 degrees all around the magnet is to use a plasma globe emptied by noble gas and filled with liquid suspension and ferrofluid. The magnet (preferably spherical) can be put in place of the high-voltage electrod, of course only after the conductive paint has been removed. High voltage wire tube reaches the middle of the globe, so you can see the magnetic field almost entirely. The globe have to be equipped with two strips of RGB LEDs positioned at 90 degrees to each other in the equatorial region of the globe (ideally each LED to be at 45 degrees), I think it would difuse perfectly and the centrifugal magnetic lines could see very well, according to their CW or CCW polarization. What do you think?

Thanks,
SaDAng

[Dog-One]

Dielectric Inertial Plane

--- Dielectric Inertial Plane ---

Ken,

I've been studying your book and watching your videos--starting to get a handle on a good portion of this. So I went back to an old project to have another look, the Steven Mark TPU. The modern version in this video that is being taken apart appears very similar:

Akula Self Runner Demo - YouTube


I think what I see in this device is a soft iron wire wound in a half dozen or so loops to make basically a toroid core. This core is then wrapped two more times with "control" coils.

The idea explained to me is the control coils "squeeze" the core winding like a garden hose, creating a DC current.

So back to studying your work. If the core in this device above has in it somewhere a dielectric inertial plane, can these so-called control coils push/force that dielectric inertial plane around? If they can and that dielectric plane is forced in only one direction, would that produce the effect of a DC current?

I'm asking this because you are the scientist here; I'm more of an engineer. And in this case a reverse-engineer. And there is nothing better than to take an example and put it to the test of your research to see what we can explain and what we can't.

[TheoriaApophasis]

--- Dielectric Inertial Plane ---
The idea explained to me is the control coils "squeeze" the core winding like a garden hose, creating a DC current.

So back to studying your work. If the core in this device above has in it somewhere a dielectric inertial plane, can these so-called control coils push/force that dielectric inertial plane around? If they can and that dielectric plane is forced in only one direction, would that produce the effect of a DC current?

I'm asking this because you are the scientist here; I'm more of an engineer. And in this case a reverse-engineer. And there is nothing better than to take an example and put it to the test of your research to see what we can explain and what we can't.

I just added 4 more chalkboard videos, however I should NOT have made the videos at 2AM, when I am so tired, but "oh well"

they are here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtoOKA6H_wU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OW04mByICQ

etc etc


I have about 30 more videos to make and about 200+ more pages to add to the book over 3+ more editions.

There are 2 devices in the "back room" I will not add yet/now due to patent seeking potential.


Lux et Veritas on the kind words.

[TheoriaApophasis]

--- Dielectric Inertial Plane ---

Ken,
.

I CRACKED IT!!!!! IVE PROVEN THE LAST LEG OF THE THEORY!!!!!!

golden ratio reciprocation


PROOF THAT MAGNETIC RECIPROCATION IS = PHI CUBED (1/PHI^3 = Phi Cubed) ~!~!~!!


SEE VIDEO HERE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwnM5c0aOes

THEN SEE THIS CHART::::

[TheoriaApophasis]

.

Just discovered, a simple formula for determining the centrifugal field, the centripetal, and the dielectric boundary

Its a serious proof.

(in a perfect magnet as an ideal "perfect" magnet, which of course is nearly impossible)


never the less, its a teaching proof that the golden section applies to all divergent and convergent field reciprocations

Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHDsnO3y7CA


Graph:

[sadang]

Hi Ken,

You work hard for this theory and this is appreciated. I no longer have patience and nor willingness to insist on the obvious aspects, which are ignored or even worse manipulated by current science dogmatists, who like to think in closed loops, without having the courage to revisit the fundamentals of current theories. And not even senses that are cocreators in shaping their own inner realities and the surrounding one.

Back to magnetism, your math using golden ration is a natural way of interpreting the ether manifestation. Everything use the godlen ratio patern, even if it seems to us that it is not. That's because we do not see the whole, but only the part.

Great fromula, with a lot of implications in real world. These perfect math have to be necessarily proved experiemntaly. Because there is nothing perfect in the real world, perfection being a goal. If centrifugal-centripetal geometry would comply a perfect ratio, there would be no power difference between the two poles of a magnet. In nature there is no perfect symmetry, only an apparent one. From the initial ether stress until at cosmic scale or maybe beyond, there should be a specific asymmetry. Otherwise there would be nothing. Symmetry is equal to something static. And static means nothing, means ether in its initial and athernal state. Dynamics can exist only in asymmetry and continuous stress.

However, you have surpassed my capacity of understanding with both the speed and volume of information. I have to take it slowly and see what I can do practically. And to not forget, I have a bottle with dried ferrofluid based on hydrocarbonic oil. Do you consider it can be recovered?

Keep it up,
SaDAng

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hi Ken,
These perfect math have to be necessarily proved experiemntaly.

I have already done that.

Because there is nothing perfect in the real world,

I state that in the video, this is only applies to the mathematically perfect "magnet" countless variables are at play.

In nature there is no perfect symmetry, only an apparent one.

Not so, all imperfection are just overlapping symmetries causing resultant asymmetries


Nature produces a 4 legged duck, and a 2 headed girl because of countless millions of symmetries in conjunction producing asymmetry.

And static means nothing, means ether in its initial and athernal state. Dynamics can exist only in asymmetry and continuous stress.

Magnetism is radiation, and radiation is the opposite of static anything.

radiation=polarization=divergence=creating space

just the opposite of static.

However, you have surpassed my capacity of understanding with both the speed and volume of information. I have to take it slowly and see what I can do practically. And to not forget, I have a bottle with dried ferrofluid based on hydrocarbonic oil. Do you consider it can be recovered?
SaDAng

Yes, but it would be cheaper to spend $20 on a new bottle.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Heres one for you, WHEN YOU CAN EXPLAIN THE PIC BELOW, THEN YOU UNDERSTAND MAGNETISM A LOT BETTER



HINT: it wouldnt matter if the ring and disk were square , round doesnt matter.


2x2x1" BLOCK magnet


disk magnet can ONLY rest on the inertial plane, and the KNIFE EDGE THIN steel ring can ONLY rest perpendicular to the inertial plane


no glue, no tape, no tricks, all VERY VERY EASILY balanced.

[Dog-One]

Heres one for you, WHEN YOU CAN EXPLAIN THE PIC BELOW, THEN YOU UNDERSTAND MAGNETISM A LOT BETTER

I'll take a shot at it.

The ring has aligned itself within pressure gradients flowing from the centrifugal of one side to the centripetal of the other side and vice versa.

The disc magnet has centered itself at the dielectric inertial plane with reverse spins (centripetal/centrifugal) of the big block magnet, so the flows go through the disc magnet and back to the block magnet.

Yes?

[TheoriaApophasis]

I'll take a shot at it.

The ring has aligned itself within pressure gradients flowing from the centrifugal of one side to the centripetal of the other side and vice versa.

The disc magnet has centered itself at the dielectric inertial plane with reverse spins (centripetal/centrifugal) of the big block magnet, so the flows go through the disc magnet and back to the block magnet.

Yes?

Wow, 99+% accurate. stunning stuff





NOW, you'd have to know why its doing that.

WHAT does the disk magnet have that the steel disk/ring (ring or disk, doesn't matter either way) doesn't have??

(also, gravity plays NO PART IN THIS PICTURE, NONE, I can set it up any way you want).


The steel ring will encounter the SAME enormous force in trying to bring it PARALLEL to the inertial plane as the disk magnet will inversely in trying to (and failing) bring it perpendicular to the dielectric inertial plane (the so-called 'Bloch wall' [which is merely a name/description....NOT an explanation])


(Oh, hell, does all this mean that there is NO SUCH THING as "magnetic attraction"?? And that all so-called 'attraction' is due to dielectric voidance of soft iron and "unlike poles" [age old mental premise and nonsense],…..likewise all repulsion is due to magnetism which spatial-on-spatial, and as meant counter-voidance of dielectricity.....So that would mean there is, really, NO SUCH thing as "magnetic attraction"....Crazy! Heresy!!! Insanity!!!)



Hmmm, yes, radiation (magnetism/polarization/divergence) has never attracted ANYTHING, ….it displaces other things, but it doesn't ATTRACT anything. What?? You're crazy!!! (me talking to myself) ROFL!!