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

[ionfuture]

Hello TheoriaApophasis

I just watched your 3 vids (Explaining Gyroscopic Levitation) let me say thanks for that.

But consider this. Gyroscope is spinning clockwise, you rotate string counterclockwise and gyro rises. ok good stuff but when the gyro continues to flip and is upside down it is then spinning counterclockwise and your hand is also still rotating counterclockwise.

It appears to me it is a matter of perspective. Looking down from above the gyro is spinning clockwise but from underneath looking up the gyro is spinning counterclockwise. So the important thing maybe where the gyro is attached to the string, on top then clockwise spin, if attached at bottom then counterclockwise spin for a counterclockwise rotation of your hand.

Just an observation.

ionfuture

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hello TheoriaApophasis
But consider this. Gyroscope is spinning clockwise, you rotate string counterclockwise and gyro rises. ok good stuff but when the gyro continues to flip and is upside down it is then spinning counterclockwise and your hand is also still rotating counterclockwise. ionfuture

Youll notice that it only inverts in a short pulse in response to a short increased pulse of inverse applied force.

its accelerated quickly past the force of inverse applied force, or as explained in the upcoming 4th edition, M.C. mirrored (force) cancellation.

Applied MC of F. must be > C.S. acceleration of the inert mass towards incoherent acceleration of the earth (or X body).

Some of this premise is based on the fragments of Tesla's dynamic theory of gravity.

Ultimate as said in several videos, there is no autonomous "field or force" such as Gravity.

Gravity as an autonom. entity doesnt exist, all is either force and motion or inertia and acceleration.


THere is only one force in the universe, the loss of inertia we call magnetism.


the REST is coherent inverse force vectors applied or mutually cancelling.

It appears to me it is a matter of perspective. Looking down from above the gyro is spinning clockwise but from underneath looking up the gyro is spinning counterclockwise. So the important thing maybe where the gyro is attached to the string, on top then clockwise spin, if attached at bottom then counterclockwise spin for a counterclockwise rotation of your hand.
ionfuture

its a matter of M.C. all coherent force cancellation is achieved by an inverse coherent force whereby which acceleration between the two occurs to cancel both forces.


Much greater details to come tomorrow.


upcoming video tomorrow will be far far more revealing than the simplex intro videos these are.
weight is location specific and medium specific, the same applies to all two possible modalities of force cancellation,
All is about M.C. (mirrored cancellation) by means of inverse coherent force cancellation.



Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity explained the fields of gravity through electrodynamics....... In this Tesla was right, so-called 'gravity' is nothing other than a "ground" in a reciprocating FORCE circuit. While Tesla never said THAT, it follows the extrapolation of what Tesla had meant that "gravity" is. Its just an electrodynamic(FORCE!) circuit

The centripetal accelerative ground to divergence centrifugal force and motion vectors is acceleration towards increasing potential , or as meant counterspace.




magnetic acceleration ("attraction", an utterly wrong term) and gyroscopic levitation are the exact same principles, as I will prove.

ionfuture[/QUOTE]

[Dog-One]

Thoughts...

I had some thoughts while in the middle of some trivial tasks at work that I'd really like to get your take on.

To start with, let's consider the Aether--the stuff that permeates all of our known world. If we take some this and spin it up like a gyroscope, we get dielectricity, which may also be referred to as "cold electricity". Because this is spinning, it has inertia and therefore can do real work. It is a coherent and stable form of Aether.

So lets think about what "hot electricity" may actually be. Ken has said a hybrid of dielectricity and magnetism. But what do we know about magnetism? For starters, it radiates outward from its source; it is divergent. Could this actually be dielectricity with multiple spins, simplex. Consider this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xYhrFgcyWQ

Dielectricity spun-up in such a way it throws itself into chaos. It's only direction for stability is away from its source. If we took several of Fran McCabe's machines into space, spun them up and watched how they moved, would they trace a hypotrochoid pattern as Ken has shown us magnetism does?

So "hot electricity" is a hybrid of dielectricity and magnetism. And maybe magnetism is simply just a special perturbation of dielectricity having multiple spins. Wilbert B. Smith has stated, spin is everything. Extremely simplex and possibly correct.

This leads me to some applications of this reasoning. Consider this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo42dHgrJ6g

This is a "bucking coil" arrangement that potentially produces more energy output than it requires on the input. Ken knows Russian so he can correct me if my observation is wrong. Now suppose the input is "hot electricity", meaning it carries with it what we know as magnetism, or dielectricity in its chaotic form. I suspect in order for this device to function, this form of electricity is impacted head-on with its conjugate or mirror image. This neutralizes the over-driven precession as shown in McCabe's video, leaving only coherent spin. If that is the case, the output of this device is no longer "hot electricity" carrying a magnetic component, it is instead "cold electricity" or pure dielectricity.

Anyway, something to ponder. I had to scratch this down while the thought was still clear in mind. Have at it.

[TheoriaApophasis]

So "hot electricity" is a hybrid of dielectricity and magnetism. And maybe magnetism is simply just a special perturbation of dielectricity having multiple spins. Wilbert B. Smith has stated, spin is everything. Extremely simplex and possibly correct.
.

Poincare' disk model is the most lucid explanation of magnetism, its the loss of inertia expressed as divergent reciprocation which is translational into the creation of posterior force and motion.

spin is one thing, rotation is reciprocation. Compounding transverse force vectors

Phi x Psi = electricity in plancks. (magnetic and dielectric).


Electricity terminates AS magnetism , not INTO magnetism, by losing its
dielectric component as necessitated; electricity is the product of Phi (magnetism) and Psi (dielectricity), is definitionally a hybrid
Ether modality of the product of Phi and Psi.”


NO fields terminate into space, because space has no properties (- TESLA), all termination is in counterspace as regards field modalities.


There is only one field, all else are field modalities expressed by or as the loss or inertia (the field, the Ether), or the compounding of inertia , as in the case of electricity.



Truer words were never said than "all geometry is projective geometry", which ultimately translates as "all phenomena are divergent transverse hybrid field modalities as projected from a counterspatial locus, the Ether".

[Dog-One]

Electricity terminates AS magnetism , not INTO magnetism, by losing its
dielectric component as necessitated; electricity is the product of Phi (magnetism) and Psi (dielectricity), is definitionally a hybrid
Ether modality of the product of Phi and Psi.”

Ken, can you please help me better understand the portion I underlined above?

Are you explicitly saying there is no conversion process?

For instance, if I say a car terminates as a boat, not into a boat, I mean the wheels vanish and what was a car now floats.

If that's correct, then in the case of electricity terminating, you mean the dielectric component returns to counterspace and what is left can only be referred to as magnetism.

I'm not trying to be an attorney here, just very interested in the subtly expressed in your statement.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Ken, can you please help me better understand the portion I underlined above?

Are you explicitly saying there is no conversion process?

For instance, if I say a car terminates as a boat, not into a boat, I mean the wheels vanish and what was a car now floats.

If that's correct, then in the case of electricity terminating, you mean the dielectric component returns to counterspace and what is left can only be referred to as magnetism.

I'm not trying to be an attorney here, just very interested in the subtly expressed in your statement.

your analogy is a bad one. You might say a car terminates into a lump of molten steel.

Its not a conversion, its a modality / attributional expression. A 'conservation of the Ether' if you will.

Likewise there are no straight lines in the universe, there is not a conversion, steel is steel is steel, there is only ONE field, incorrectly deemed MANY FIELDS due to attributional expressions of ONE field under multitudinous perturbations as "seen" as autonomous fields, but arent.


extrapolating attributional expressions of steel as a car "magnetism", or as a coiled steel wire "electricity", its just a transverse modality / expression of the steel UNDER perturbation.

[David G Dawson]

Tesla Video

Ken,
Saw a video that you had downloaded to You Tube but does not appear to have the second part where Eric is demonstarting the actual Tesla apparatus.
This is the first video - the 'C Max idiot':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HaqcuRCsEE

Do you have the continuation video?
Thanks.

Smokey

[TheoriaApophasis]

Ken,
Saw a video that you had downloaded to You Tube but does not appear to have the second part where Eric is demonstarting the actual Tesla apparatus.
This is the first video - the 'C Max idiot':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HaqcuRCsEE

Do you have the continuation video?
Thanks.

Smokey

that link isnt that video, youve messed something up somehow.

[David G Dawson]

Tesla Video

Ken,
Gee that was quick!
Yes. I erred and should be:

Eric P Dollard confronts a "C is max" idiot from the Cult of Quantum in the crowd - NickTube - Hight speed video experience with HD Quality

After a bit more sleuthing found it to be part of the SBARC video which I do have here and will view.
Sorry to trouble you.

How is everything going?

Smokey

[TheoriaApophasis]

How is everything going?

kicking ass and taking names.

[ionfuture]

Where is counter space located in a hollow sphere with a vacuum inside ?

[spacecase0]

Where is counter space located in a hollow sphere with a vacuum inside ?

the way I see it is that it is where things are when they are not here,
if something is more than half in our reality we can see it, (even quantum physics knows of this)
when it is not here, it is in counter space

I wonder if someone else has a better explanation

[TheoriaApophasis]

Where is counter space located in a hollow sphere with a vacuum inside ?

WHERE defines a topos (a place, a 'where'). Such a denotation contradicts the premise of counterspace.


a sphere is already 4 levels from counterspace (point line circle sphere).

inside what? inside and outside have no meaning.

[ionfuture]

Thanks for your answers.

If we magnetize a hollow iron sphere and end up with what is normally called ( N and S poles) I'll use that loosely to describe what we call poles. Will the dielectric inertial plane still be halfway between these poles ?

And will it cross the center of the hollow sphere ?

Hope u don't mind me asking questions ?

Also have u seen this? Proof of the Longitudinal Magneto-Dielectric Wave.

Superluminal Scalar Waves for Communications

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow


ionfuture

[ionfuture]

WHERE defines a topos (a place, a 'where'). Such a denotation contradicts the premise of counterspace.


a sphere is already 4 levels from counterspace (point line circle sphere).

inside what? inside and outside have no meaning.

To my limited thinking capacity in order to have counter space you would also need space.

So I don't see a (point, a line or a circle) as having space. These appear as 2D objects, in order to have space I would think u need a 3D object and the sphere is a most simple 3D object.

Therefore how can we have counter space if we don't also have space ?

Anyway u got me thinking, back to Gyroscopes.

ionfuture