ENLIGHTENED MAGNETISM (The Full Proof of Ken Wheeler's Theories)

[Markoul]

Hi,

I think i already answered your question. didn't I?

[Markoul]

Hi,

I think i already answered your question. didn't I?[/QUOTE]

no it does not.

In your left picture the first halfway movement from the left is obsolete.


You can create the magnet just by moving the magnet above from the middle of the bar to an end.

However, if you move from an end of the steel bar to its middle no magnet is created. Try it out!

Best Regards,

EM

[bistander]

Hi,

I think i already answered your question. didn't I?

If that was what you consider an acceptable answer, then use this for my answer, but looking back I see no question from you.

All of which demonstrates there is nothing different or particularly interesting in the middle of the magnetized bar. It is the same as the rest of it, composed of orientated microscopic domains.

Stroking in only one way the entire length of the bar aligns its domains in a uniform direction throughout the entire bar making the middle the same as all the rest of it. This demonstrates there is nothing different in the middle.

So explain why you think, and provide some logical deduction from evidence, that the bar transforms into two domains, one at each end, separated in the middle by a Block wall.

bi

[aljhoa]

"bar transforms into two domains, one at each end"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn4A6VJodow


Al

[Markoul]

that's a hoax

[Markoul]

This is getting tiresome

So explain why you think, and provide some logical deduction from evidence, that the bar transforms into two domains, one at each end, separated in the middle by a Block wall.

I think you are not paying attention.

I already have inside all my previous threads I even gave my own theory about black mater relation to electromagnetism.

I also suggested to you an experiment proving that magnetism can created by only moving from the middle to one end of a steel bar but not the other way around. If Bloch domain as you say is nothing special, why is this? I believe this clearly proves that magnetism is a diamagnetic field transformation and it is from where it generates.

Also magnetism is best described by quantum mechanics and needs therefore a ground state to operate thus the Bloch region of a magnet AND NO it is not the same as the other regions of a magnet. It is well known in science as the domain wall of a dipole magnet and magnetic strength drops to nearly zero in this region meaning you magnetic domains are not parallel to poles axis.

Magnetism is not created by material structure lattice of magnetic unpolarized material (not a magnet) but by the electrical field applied electrically polarizing the material structure of it.

So NO electricity makes a magnet and not its material structure. material structure makes only a material more susceptible to magnetism.

Please, it is fine to object but there is no point in endless debate.

let us agree that we disagree.

Bye

EM

[aljhoa]

that's a hoax

So are these:

the bar transforms into two domains, one at each end...

Is this a hoax and is it only fluid dynamics?




Al

[Markoul]

The above is correct using electromagnetism general theory.

Magnetization and magnets are however better explained today by quantum mechanics therefore a better illustration of the magnetization process and a magnet is the bellow illustration:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TCa...ew?usp=sharing

notice the two opposite ejected jets or vortices North and South are what we call dipole magnetism, however both get ejected from the monopole scalar magnetic field of the dark matter domain, that is why it is called domain wall (Bloch wall).

Why this is hapening at the Bloch region?

Electric fields act as a barrier for magnetic radiation (think about it like a shield), the don't like each other and repel each other.

Only where electric field is nullified E=0, magnetism ejects out of the dark matter domain and pushes back and shrinks electric field in both directions. That is why you will not able to measure any voltage across a ferrite magnet. To demagnetize you have to apply via a coil to the magnet an external electric field which will close the cap on the Bloch region and stop the magnetic radiation poring out.

take care,

EM

[bistander]

EM wave vs magnetic field

EM,

I think your problem is you confuse electromagnetic waves and static magnetic fields.

Electromagnetic radiation consists of waves of electric and magnetic fields, but not all configurations of electric and magnetic fields are described as "radiation." Certainly static fields, like the Earth's magnetic field and the other fields you describe, are not called "radiation."

From:
https://physics.stackexchange.com/qu...etic-radiation

bi

[Markoul]

no i am explaining electromagnetism at its genesis

as for EM waves these are due free electrons.

Electromagnetism is caused always by a electrons unbalanced distribution on a medium either if its due free electrons (waves) or polarized bond electrons (static) it is still called electromagnetism as such is a magnet it is a quantum electromagnetic machine.

EM

[Ufopolitics]

The Purpose of this Thread...

Hello to All,

Now, to all posting here:

Guys, the main reason of this Thread, as all others I have put together related to Magnetism and the True Magnetic Field, is to reach an Enlightenment, just as Title says...hoping that we ALL reach an Agreement.

So, "agreeing to disagreeing" WILL NOT GET US ABSOLUTELY ANYWHERE!

@Markoul: It is great to have you here posting , besides all your knowledge... you belong to the "Academy"...or call it "The Scientific Establishment" ...and it really pleases me to see someone like you seeing Magnetic Fields different than Conventional Physics.

However, arguing about the "ORIGINS" or whatever Magnetic Fields "step out from", like now - according to you- Magnetic Fields are not coming from the Aether, but from "Dark Matter, or Dark Energy"... this arguments does not contribute to HELP UNDERSTAND MAGNETIC FIELDS.

Arguments about where the Field COMES FROM, ORIGINATES FROM, is kind of "The Origins History of the Magnetic Field" and that is fine and dandy, "nice book"...but serves like a big ZERO to help understand the Magnetic Field.

Second; If You re-read the Title of this Thread it reads clearly that is SUPPORTING K. Wheeler THEORY in a 100%, Therefore, and please, do NOT come here to write that Ken's Theory is wrong...and you are right.

With all due respect, the Day that You put together a STANDALONE NOVEL THEORY BOOK ABOUT MAGNETISM (meaning not "backed up" by Quantum Physics, nor ANY other one) BUT YOUR OWN THEORY, in a BOOK, like Ken did, of as many pages, illustrations, REAL EXPERIMENTS, etc,etc...then you could open a Thread and render all your findings there.

And so, I will be more than happy to read it and offer all my opinions about it.

But so far, HERE, that's all we have.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Finding a "Common" reasoning between Two Theories...

Now, related to my opinion about all arguments here:

1- ELECTRIC VERSUS MAGNETIC FIELDS

I do NOT think that "JUST ANY" Electric Field will generate a Magnetic Field.

Electricity (or an Electric Field) is just "ONE OF THE MANY COMPONENTS" to build ("put together", if you like) a Magnetic Field.

But that Electric Field MUST COMPLY WITH A SPECIFIC GEOMETRY in order to create a Magnetic Field.

That "Geometry" anyone knows what it looks like: A COIL OF CONDUCTIVE WIRE WINDING, or call it a SPRING LIKE SHAPE but that spring type shape MUST BE WRAPPED AROUND THE FERROMAGNETIC CORE.

If that spring is just around the "sides" of core, but not including it WITHIN (like we all know) then, even there is an Electric Field...there would NEVER BE any Magnetic Field generated, PERIOD.

Conclusion: Electric Field Geometry must be SPECIFIC to generate a Magnetic Field, hence we can not just consider that "any electric field" will generate magnetism.

Much less the term "Electricity" (or electrical flow) is completely incorrect to say it will create magnetic fields, "just like that".

Otherwise, if true, then by just connecting two terminals positive and negative to any iron bar ENDS...will magnetize that IRON core...True?...of course NOT, NEVER!!

2- FERROMAGNETIC MOLECULAR POLARIZATION (DOMAIN ALIGNMENTS) VERSUS MAGNETIC FIELD SPATIAL SPECTRUM

Here I would like you to, please, try to "see in the invisible"...

I believe -like I wrote before- that the molecular ferromagnetic alignments due to the presence (Influence) or CARRYING a Magnetic Field are true, as we have been taught, meaning, FERROMAGNETIC CORES do not establish any difference in their molecular center.

This Particles, molecules or as you like to call them...are completely STATIC, meaning they can NOT MOVE within the core material, therefore all they do is to get polarized.

Sprinkling Iron filings over a ferromagnetic bar magnet will ADAPT, AND SHOW AN EXACT ALIGNMENT as that Bar "assumes".

All of the above does NOT mean at all, that we are looking at the REAL MAGNETIC FIELD SPECTRUM, based on either inner core or outer particles alignments.

Only way I can find, so far to example this is by comparing it with a light bulb...it could be an incandescent or even an LED would do...

When we send electricity through the Light Bulb terminals, right at the Incandescent Filament is where we can "see" an Electrical Flow, due to all the properties of that conductive metal, plus the vacuum of the environment...we get very dark glasses and we only see a straight and flaming bright wire...a line.

But now, Does that incandescent short and fine FLAMING wire represents the LIGHT SPECTRUM, or the REAL LIGHTING VOLUME OF THOSE TRILLIONS OF PHOTONS ILLUMINATING THE ENTIRE ROOM?

OF COURSE NOT!!

In an LED we also have two elements, like the two terminals holding the Tungsten Filament, except here cathode-anode are not connected by any wire...but kind of a "semiconductor" a diode...all those COMPONENTS make the Light Spectrum Volume

Same way as when we apply a specific electric flow around a ferromagnetic core...and that core will show a flow...that we can see with some specific instruments (domains alignment)...but that alignment does not represents the MAGNETIC FIELD SPECTRUM SPATIAL VOLUME, even though they are both (MASS ALIGNMENTS-SPATIAL SPECTRUM) using same Dimension, same Space-Time.

Hope you all understand this analogy.


No more time...end


Regards to All


Ufopolitics

[Markoul]

Dear Ufopolitics,

Thank you for you valuable insight concerning these matters and fields.

The debate about matter generating field or field generating matter reminds the old, the chicken made the egg or the egg made the chicken.

I am not disputing Ken's theory and I am intrigued by his intellect. However, this does not take me the right away to notice some discrepancies in some points of his theory shown by empirical data we have so far in order to improve the theory.

See it as my small contribution to Ken's theory.

For example the are no flux reciprocating direct from the two poles.

Empirical data shows only two opposite separate twisted toroid vortices hyperboloids generated out by the secretion disc on the ground state middle of magnet namely its diamagnetic plane or else Bloch region domain wall.

These directly implies that since magnetic radiation originates from a specific region and we can not see the interaction taking place in this region, that it must get ejected in someway from an invisible not known yet energy or matter domain interacting with our know matterial word thus as we call it ordinary matter and energy.

Call it aether or dark matter, doesn't really matter.

So magnetic field of dipole is 3D geometrically essentially not a sphere but two hemispheres separated by the Bloch domain wall.

There is no direct connection from North to South pole. Look it as two monopoles joined via the ground state domain wall.

To say otherwise without empirical data available to support it, is plain wrong.

Also notice gyromagnetic ratio of of magnetic dipole is preserved since field geometry elementary is not changed since it consists from two hemispheres.

So i am not an disputer of Ken's theory but merely a contributor.

Also i find injustice to project on me when there are real disputers of Ken Wheeler's theory in this thread here.

Nevertheless, i would like thank anyone in this thread who coped with me and wish you the best for finding enlightenment.

Kind Regards,

EM

[Gambeir]

[QUOTE=Markoul;309663]Dear Ufopolitics,

Thank you for you valuable insight concerning these matters and fields.

The debate about matter generating field or field generating matter reminds the old, the chicken made the egg or the egg made the chicken.

I am not disputing Ken's theory and I am intrigued by his intellect. However, this does not take me the right away to notice some discrepancies in some points of his theory shown by empirical data we have so far in order to improve the theory.

See it as my small contribution to Ken's theory.

For example the are no flux reciprocating direct from the two poles.

Empirical data shows only two opposite separate twisted toroid vortices hyperboloids generated out by the secretion disc on the ground state middle of magnet namely its diamagnetic plane or else Bloch region domain wall.

[B]These directly implies that since magnetic radiation originates from a specific region and we can not see the interaction taking place in this region, that it must get ejected in someway from an invisible not known yet energy or matter domain interacting with our know matterial word thus as we call it ordinary matter and energy.

Call it aether or dark matter, doesn't really matter.


Markoul;
This isn't intended to be nit~picking: That isn't my intent: I can see that you're making honest explanations based on what you believe right now, some of which I find useful and interesting, and I want you to be aware of that so that you understand I appreciate your work since writing is labor intensive. Your labors are not in vain, and not un~appreciated, which I think is important to communicate to you personally.

However, as painful as writing these posts often are, they do come with the benefit of refining knowledge, even as our errors are exposed by doing so, which then enable the refinement of ideas we ourselves hold: None of us are immune to the way the blade slices. Markoul, I agree with you in the sense that the magnetic field is flowing out of an un~recognized energy field. I do not, however, feel it is an unknown energy field, merely it is an un~recognized energy field.

There is a significant difference between unknown and un~recognized; what I've suggested is it is likely we already do know aspects of the this field because it already has exposed itself in some forms in the existing space around us right now. So I have to disagree with you when you say that it doesn't matter how we define the space from which the magnetic field flows out from. It matter a great deal in my opinion. What is likely is that there is a cross correlation between what we think we know and what we haven't yet thought of which spans across to explain cause and effect, and so it's likely that neither the known or the unknown is entirely correct; if that makes any sense at all?

Dark matter/energies is a concept that puts us in the realm of witchcraft, where nothing is known, and so I have to reject it and revert to other known means which puts us back in the realm of honest science where we at least have some knowledge and proven concepts. One of which appears to be time frame dragging which shows that speed and time are correlated to each other and that both are correlated to distortions in time and space.


The problem with dark matter is that it is a manifest invention with a primary function designed to up~hold conventional explanations about the way things work on a galactic scale. Thus, dark matter/energies is an invention designed explicitly as an expedient; a back~door way to block more rational explanations from gaining their proper station in the realm of scientific discussion. Simply put, pure mumbo~jumbo, whereas if we divest ourselves in this spectral suppositions, which are honestly drawn out of the historical context of witchcraft trials, and instead revert to the tried and true, then supportable notions drawn from known physics and the interaction of matter and energy in motion will get us much further along with understanding phenomena through experimental tests and hypothetical suppositions than reverting to explanations where in witchcraft is used to explain an unknown result, and that's all dark matter is. It's just pure nonsense is what it is. It isn't even remotely rational in my opinion, even though I once also thought it was rational~ LOL~

If we instead take time as a model to try to explain the outcome then here we have an explanation for cause and effect. We already know that time exists, that it can be altered, we know this. We know that speed and time are correlated. If we all would divest ourselves of this dark energy babble then I think we all might see where other things you've written make sense. So in no way am I saying all that you've posted is gibberish at all. What I am saying is that dark matter is more than just anything. It's a veil in a very wide sense and it's blocking and obscuring clear thinking, just as it was intended to do when it was invented. That is it's purpose.

Ya know the main problem I'm seeing, beyond the intentionally designed plots of the powers that be, which includes this dark matter witchcraft, is that people cannot get past this evident highway formed by the re~aligned crystalline patterns in a magnet. Ya look at that and it's all lined up like a one way road, and that's the trick to this thing, it is a one way road with all roads leading to the center: All roads lead to Rome. It's that kind of highway system. It's why I've said it's like a bunch of magnifying lens all focused upon the center, or like a mass array lens in this sense.

So magnetic field of dipole is 3D geometrically essentially not a sphere but two hemispheres separated by the Bloch domain wall.

There is no direct connection from North to South pole. Look it as two monopoles joined via the ground state domain wall.

What if it isn't a wall Markoul, but rather the ingestion intake point; the realm of an accretion plane, the point where in space there exists a so~called "event horizon." In that case then both hemispheres are joined, they just appear to not be, and the illusion is due to the description of a "Bloch Wall" (which is incorrect). It isn't a wall, it's something akin to a vacuum point such as an accretion disc induces in space.

NASA's idea of a Puslar.


https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/scienc...ar_diagram.png

Russia's idea of a black hole accretion disc ~ well maybe...just guessing really.

To say otherwise without empirical data available to support it, is plain wrong.

Also notice gyromagnetic ratio of of magnetic dipole is preserved since field geometry elementary is not changed since it consists from two hemispheres.

So i am not an disputer of Ken's theory but merely a contributor.

Also i find injustice to project on me when there are real disputers of Ken Wheeler's theory in this thread here.

Nevertheless, i would like thank anyone in this thread who coped with me and wish you the best for finding enlightenment.

Kind Regards,

EM

Well I hope that this post, despite taking a general position of opposition, does nevertheless also show that I do find you have contributed which, personally speaking, I found useful and which helped me to have another view on the whole.

[Markoul]

Dear Gambeir,

Thank you for your kind words, a lot of labor and care is put in your writting and I really appreciate this.

However, i kindly disaagre with you. Dark matter does not hinder our understanding and enlightenment and don't get confused by its exotic name.

No more than 500 years ago the invisible electromagnetism and atoms could evenly be described with these terms dark matter and dark energy by people of this age.

Scientists and researches are today at a dead end. So we must try not to look at the tree but at the whole forest picture in order to find the truth.

Our theory accounts only for a tiny part (5% the say) of all of what is actually out there.

We will never solve the puzzle without all of its pieces.

For 2000 years and more now we are playing with 5 from the total 100 pieces of the puzzle.

All i am saying is THAT WE ARE MISSING 95 PIECES!!

... and ask you to explore unexplored territory... what more exciting than that as Faraday and Tesla did! chewing the same gum all the time is boring and no new discoveries will be made ever. Discovery is the search of unknown territory.



Take care,

EM