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

[bistander]

Static fields

Hello Gambeir,

Here are a few interesting answers to a question.

Does a static electric interact with a magnetic field?

Sure.

They interact, or better said, they combine to produce a flow of energy. There is no flow of energy in a static field by itself. When we combine the fields, the energy flow per unit area is given by the Poynting vector:

The E and H are respectively the electric and magnetic field intensities and the Poynting vector, S, is sometimes symbolized by P or N.

Et Ceteras
The fields do not alter each other. That is, if at some point we have an electrostatic field and then overlay a magnetostatic field, the field values of each field remains unaffected by the existence of the other field.

We cannot uniquely define electric and magnetic fields at a point anyway, as different observers in different reference frames will disagree on these field values. This is a fundamental consequence of relativity.
1.4k Views ·

Yes, sort of. The fields do not change each other, but when there is a static magnetic field from one source and a static electric field from another source, the combined electromagnetic field stores angular momentum that would not be stored in either field alone.

To understand this, start with the magnet firmly connected to the lab floor at point (0,0,0) and the electric source far away. As you bring the electric source into the vicinity of the magnet, the electric source experiences a small sideways force due its velocity and the magnetic field. If you counteract this force, then you are providing a torque which, applied over time, causes an angular momentum. When you finish moving the source and attach it firmly to the floor, nothing is moving. The angular momentum has to go somewhere and that somewhere is the electromagnetic field.

243 Views
Static electric fields do not interact with static magnetic fields. This is why these two fields were considered unrelated phenomena in the early 1800's, until Faraday discovered the appearance of an electric field when a magnetic field changes in time. Only when the sources of the fields, i.e. electrostatic charges for the electric field or constant-current loops for the magnetic fields are in motion, these sources interact with the static field. The term "interact" means that the moving charges or moving currents feel a force.
1.5k Views ·

Above quotes from: https://www.quora.com/Does-a-static-...magnetic-field

When the fellow doing your experiment bought the magnet, it came with the magnetic field (static, nonmoving relative to the magnet). He then places the magnet, and its static field into the tank. The magnetic field in and around the magnet may have been altered slightly due to the metal at the base and the permeability of the liquid, but is again static. Once charges begin to move in the static magnetic field, Lorentz forces are imparted on those charges. The charges had an initial motion upwards and the magnetic field causes a circular motion, together appearing as a upward moving helix.

Of course there is a reaction force on the magnetic field and hence the magnet, but the friction at the magnet base prevents counter-rotation of the magnet. This is no different than a motor having a permanent magnet frame (stator) and a wound armature (rotor). The magnets in the frame establish a static magnetic field in which the armature carries charges as current, perpendicular to the field. The resulting forces on the moving charges cause the torque, relative rotor to stator. That's why the motor stator will have a flange or mounting bracket; to keep the magnetic field static (stationary).

So what you witness in the experiment is simple electric motor action.

When a charged particle moves in a static magnetic field, it traces a helical path in which the helix axis is parallel to the magnetic field, and in which the speed of the .

From Wikipedia, magnetic field.

0 Hz
Characteristics of the field and its use

Static magnetic fields are constant fields, which do not change in intensity or direction over time, in contrast to low and high frequency alternating fields. Hence, they have a frequency of 0 Hz. They exert an attracting force on metallic objects containing, for example, iron, nickel or cobalt, and so magnets are commonly used for this purpose. In nature, the geomagnetic field of the earth exerts a force from south to north that allows, for example, the operation of a compass. Much stronger fields are generated by some types of industrial and medical equipment, such as in Medical Resonance Imaging (MRI) devices.

The strength of a static magnetic flux density is expressed in tesla (T) or in some countries in gauss (G). The strength of the natural geomagnetic field varies from about 30 to 70 µT (1 µT is 10-6 T). Household magnets have strengths in the order of several tens of millitesla (1 mT = 10-3 T). By contrast, the fields of MRI equipment vary from between 1.5 to up to as much as 10 T.

From:
https://www.icnirp.org/en/frequencie...-hz/index.html

MRI scanners use static magnetic fields
Credit: Kasuga Huang
A magnetic field is a force field created by a magnet or as a consequence of the movement of the charges (flow of electricity). The magnitude (intensity) of a magnetic field is usually measured in Tesla (T or mT).

Static magnetic fields do not vary over time, and as such do not have a frequency (0 Hz). Examples are the fields generated by a permanent magnet or the Earth’s magnetic field.

From: Electromagnetic Fields: 8. Static magnetic fields like those used in medical imaging

Regards,

bi

[Gambeir]

Hello Gambeir,

Here are a few interesting answers to a question.

Oh please, pretending to ask questions followed by posting ready made solutions only proves you've no interest at all in doing anything here but causing trouble.

Pretend to ask , then find ready made solutions and existing answers. How much more phony can you get? Anyone can do what you're just managed to accomplish. It's a play out of the disinfo book.

You ignored everything which you couldn't explain with data pulled from wikipedia, or some other ready made source. Laughably showing you have no clue what's happening since the data is in wikipedia in a round about way.

Nobody cares what you have to say. I don't and doubt many others do, for it's never inventive, creative, helpful, thoughtful, or kind. Your responses are almost always nothing more than a eyesore full of claptrap contrived to picture everything from anyone else as wrong, simple minded, and dubious.

You're posts are nothing more than an ill mannered corruption of malignant dismissive claptrap blathered for self aggrandizement. One merely has to look the nonsense you've just posted. The worst part is that you're like a perfect example of the worst kind self appointed teacher, one you cannot escape from evidently, and because no one here has had sense enough to ban you from the entire site.

[bistander]

What a guy

Oh please, pretending to ask questions followed by posting ready made solutions only proves you've no interest at all in doing anything here but causing trouble.

Pretend to ask , then find ready made solutions and existing answers. How much more phony can you get? Anyone can do what you're just managed to accomplish. It's a play out of the disinfo book.

You ignored everything which you couldn't explain with data pulled from wikipedia, or some other ready made source. Laughably showing you have no clue what's happening since the data is in wikipedia in a round about way.

Nobody cares what you have to say. I don't and doubt many others do, for it's never inventive, creative, helpful, thoughtful, or kind. Your responses are almost always nothing more than a eyesore full of claptrap contrived to picture everything from anyone else as wrong, simple minded, and dubious.

You're posts are nothing more than an ill mannered corruption of malignant dismissive claptrap blathered for self aggrandizement. One merely has to look the nonsense you've just posted. The worst part is that you're like a perfect example of the worst kind self appointed teacher, one you cannot escape from evidently, and because no one here has had sense enough to ban you from the entire site.

I hope you notice that I post information related to the topic. You post opinions of me.

bi

[Gambeir]

I hope you notice that I post information related to the topic. You post opinions of me.

bi

No you don't, you just think you do, hence the reason I'm now telling you what your character is like. Wake up and smell the coffee.

A magnet is not a perpetual motion device. Yet this is what you've maintained with the most absurd explanations, stating that an electric charge "somehow" results in a static field which maintains itself ~ forever~

You continue to deny visible facts and insist that what we can all visibly see for ourselves with the video I posted is not actually happening. In other words, you are inventing a magical explanation over addressing the fact that you're wrong.

I have no idea what you think is transpiring inside a magnet. Whatever you've offered in that area, if anything, is so illogical and disjointed that I have no memory of what it might have even been. A strong indicator that whatever it was, if anything at all, must be wrong just because it's so wacko that it cannot even be logically retained.

You're entitled to your opinions, but that's all they are. What you think are proofs are now shown to be mistaken opinions by new data. What you've offered as some sort of conclusive proofs are mistaken ideas born long ago and out of date. Yet you continue to deny anyone else's work has any value, ignoring ever bit of material I myself have offered, as well as belittling it and insulting everyone with bombastic bull****. I mean to say you see nothing in the Jerry Bayles PDF say's more and is a greater insult than any bombastic personal insults I can invent, and I'm pretty well versed in farm language, so you've done that yourself: I didn't do it, you did it.

Since that is obvious to everyone else and it is extremely annoying to have to listen to your idiocy, then I've no other recourse but to treat you in the same manner, and as you're as dense as a brick it's now only possible to gain your attention with personal insults, which however well deserved, are not what I or anyone else desires, but it is really your objective to wreck everything here on this forum. To disrupt any kind of real understanding. You don't discuss, you insult, you offer petrified opinions, and in my opinion you're an evil we can all do without.

There's no place I have seen anywhere that you've done anything but to disrupt, to deny, and to do all that is possible to destroy original ideas. I'm seriously beginning to wonder whose payroll you're on.

[Gambeir]

I hope you notice that I post information related to the topic. You post opinions of me.

bi

You don't discuss anything bistander: You say others are wrong while handing out a conventional explanation as proof and while insulting their observations and belittling their contributions, and while ignoring anything which conflicts with your own explanations, all of which are drawn from conventional notions about the way things work.

You ignored the fact that the Bayles material shows that a magnetic field is not a static field. You ignored the material showing this field is a medium which corroborates Ufopolitics and Kens notions. You ignored the information and which says a magnetic field is a moving, flowing medium, and capable of acting independent of the originating source, just as a vortex of air may act independent; you ignored all that along with the profound implications this information carries. You ignored me when I pointed this out previously. Yet you say you're addressing the material huh?

I'm incensed by your manners and lack of morals. We are trying to raise humanity up, but you seem to be on the opposite side of this goal and bent on the reverse. Join the human race or leave it but stop pretending you're addressing the facts.

[bistander]

No motion

...
A magnet is not a perpetual motion device. Yet this is what you've maintained with the most absurd explanations, stating that an electric charge "somehow" results in a static field which maintains itself ~ forever~...

I've never said or implied a magnet or a magnetic field is perpetual motion. In fact, my contention is that there is no motion in the static magnetic field, above the atomic level. As far as perpetual, maybe. I had a magnet stuck to the side of my refrigerator for over 20 years until I sent the appliance to recycling. There are PM motors in 60 year old cars which still function. Magnetic fields perpetual? Don't know, but seemingly able to be static and stable for long perionds, likely centuries.

You notice in my first reply to your posted video I used the analogy to gravity. Can a static gravitational field be perpetual?

...
You ignored the fact that the Bayles material shows that a magnetic field is not a static field. You ignored the material showing this field is a medium which corroborates Ufopolitics and Kens notions. You ignored the information and which says a magnetic field is a moving, flowing medium, and capable of acting independent of the originating source, just as a vortex of air may act independent; you ignored all that along with the profound implications this information carries. You ignored me when I pointed this out previously. Yet you say you're addressing the material huh?...

I didn't ignore anything of the like. In fact I asked you for clarification on the Bayles paper which you never got around to. Disagreeing with and providing arguments to material or theories isn't ignoring them. If I was ignoring them I'd be silent. What benefit has all this fantasy magnetism provided? The classic science in which I believe has illuminated and enlightened the world providing the means for you to insult me.

bi

[bistander]

Moving field image

Last night my adviser, co-author and Dean, made a genuine observation proving once and for all that ferrocell depicts correctly the geometry of the field of a magnet and not the iron fillings and most importantly that field shown by ferrocell is 100% drawn accordingly and perfect match by the magnetic field of the magnet and not by any light interference phenomena.
...

Doesn't this video show that the image moves location relative to the magnet depending on the position of the position of the light source? So you are telling us since the ferrocell depicts the magnetic field perfectly,100%, the magnetic field must also be moving with the position of the light source, right?

[VIDEO]v=Iwc-oBGSGeg[/VIDEO]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwc-oBGSGeg

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Oh please, pretending to ask questions followed by posting ready made solutions only proves you've no interest at all in doing anything here but causing trouble.

Pretend to ask , then find ready made solutions and existing answers. How much more phony can you get? Anyone can do what you're just managed to accomplish. It's a play out of the disinfo book.

You ignored everything which you couldn't explain with data pulled from wikipedia, or some other ready made source. Laughably showing you have no clue what's happening since the data is in wikipedia in a round about way.

Nobody cares what you have to say. I don't and doubt many others do, for it's never inventive, creative, helpful, thoughtful, or kind. Your responses are almost always nothing more than a eyesore full of claptrap contrived to picture everything from anyone else as wrong, simple minded, and dubious.

You're posts are nothing more than an ill mannered corruption of malignant dismissive claptrap blathered for self aggrandizement. One merely has to look the nonsense you've just posted. The worst part is that you're like a perfect example of the worst kind self appointed teacher, one you cannot escape from evidently, and because no one here has had sense enough to ban you from the entire site.

Hello Gambeir,

Thanks for describing Bistander EXACTLY as he is in just a few words...

That's exactly how Bistander acts...plus whenever he can not get away with a web searched "ready" answer...then he will just fly away from the Thread...

He keeps on calling Ken Wheeler's and all my EXPERIMENTAL DATA..."Fantasy Magnetism"

He keeps asking Markoul for "Empirical data"...when I am exhausted to present to Bistander so much "Empirical Data" based on the two main simple descriptors of "Empirical"...EXPERIMENT AND OBSERVATION.

FOR EXAMPLE:

He just do not want to admit there is a CLEAR PARTIAL SPIN ON A MAGNETIC POLE, when I have shown it very clear on a CRT HORIZONTAL SCANLINE:



Then I have made all the DETAILED graphics on BOTH SPINS:







But still...Bistander can not see a Spin in ALL the above Graphics...and believe me, He knows how a CRT works very well....what it is composed off....plus how is the Scanline Plane (rastered) achieved, etc,etc

He still do not see a PARTIAL SPIN there...

When we approach or take away magnet this spin increases with shorter distance, as decreases to zero line when magnet is pulled away.

THESE ARE THE CLEAREST FARADAY'S + LENZ PRINCIPLES ON INDUCTION FROM EARLIER EXPERIMENTS WITH A COIL AND A CYLINDRICAL MAGNET!!!

When we approach (INSERT) Cylindrical magnet within empty Coil we observe a POSITIVE INCREASE of Induced Energy (EMF) on Galvanometer...

Whenever we extract (pull away) the magnet we see a NEGATIVE REACTION (REVERSED SPIN)...AS LENZ OBSERVED...

Still Bistander do NOT see a spin there...

I should have better write "Bistander still...do not WANT TO see a Spin above..."

I went to Old Geometries on a Physical Spin Concept...my own graphics...not gathered from anywhere, note my "dedication" to Bistander at the bottom...:



I did same image in reverse colors...to see if Bistander will see it better?



Then He got on saying all he sees there is a "DISPLACEMENT"... but not a SPIN.

ANYTHING THAT HAS A CONSTANT CENTER, PLUS TWO OPPOSITE FORCES AT EACH SIDE OF THE PIVOT POINT IS CALLED ROTATION, WHETHER PARTIAL OR NOT, STILL IS A SPIN.

And then Member "Ricards" approach to me also saying that I am the ONLY one who sees a Spin there...

REALLY GUYS?

Ricards...another Bistander but kind off "inferior"?


But then...Bistander just flew away from Thread...end of it...now getting here and facing Markoul...asking for more "Empirical Data or Evidence"


Regards Gambeir, please keep "UNMASKING" who Bistander really is...


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

The Primer Fields Part 1...David LaPoint

Doesn't this video show that the image moves location relative to the magnet depending on the position of the position of the light source? So you are telling us since the ferrocell depicts the magnetic field perfectly,100%, the magnetic field must also be moving with the position of the light source, right?

[VIDEO]v=Iwc-oBGSGeg[/VIDEO]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwc-oBGSGeg

Regards,

bi

Problem is People are waking up little by little...they will eventually get to a completely FULL realization of what has been going on...in the past 200 years...

Then it will become VIRAL... and ABSOLUTELY NO ONE WOULD BE ABLE TO STOP IT FROM GOING AND GOING...like a Down Hill Snow ball.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EPlyiW-xGI[/VIDEO]

Video above was from Dec 2012...

Timm Vanderelli is the creator of Ferrocell...and video posted by Bistander above...

Timm wants to preserve his Patent on the USPTO...and I understand that....reason why He will always try to "comply with the Dogmatic Science" around Us all...

I also know Timm, as I have purchased Ferrocells from him, as he has also contributed to my work by donating some excellent lens...plus emails exchange on our opinions on the whole subject.

I got to know Timm, thanks to Ken Wheeler's Book.


Ufopolitics

[Markoul]

The debate is over

For everyone who believes that iron filings can depict the flux field of a magnet. And the field is force lines going, according to mainstream from N to S pole.

The below picture uses special made iron junks made as arrows pointing to the the direction of minimum magnetic reluctance.



If the field was as mainstream describes it with the famous iron filings why are these circled iron arrows are flipped and pointing to opposite directions where the poles are located nearest to them? Shouldn't they all point from North to South pole?!...

This is absolute proof (empirical ) that:

1) iron filings can only show one force vector of the field namely direction where the relative to their position, nearest magnetic pole is, therefore completely incapable to depict the full and real flux field of a magnet and...and actually they depict it wrongly for more than 200 years now.

2) even the iron filings in this particular arrow configuration confirm this:



goodnight and good luck!

This above picture is the Greek letter θ, first letter of the word "θεός", meaning GOD...did GOD left his signature on the magnetic field?...

Why is your Brain have to hemispheres?... why nuts (and our nuts ) have two hemispheres? why our heart has two hemispheres why all spores have two hemispheres? why why why?...because all are magnetic dipole manifestations, thus two hemispheres of condensed energy.

Why good and bad? why man a woman... and the list goes on and on... counter duality... the driving force and equilibrium of all God's creation... magnetism couldn't be an exception, even geometrically.


hahahahahaha!

EM

[bistander]

Nice video

...

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EPlyiW-xGI[/VIDEO]

Video above was from Dec 2012...

...

Thanks Ufo,

I enjoyed this video. Very well done. From five and a half years ago. 2 questions. Did the patent issue so we can see how the bowls are made? And what happened to the relatively inexpensive electric generator using the technology which had been developed?

Regards,

bi

Edit: found it. Patent issued 1/28/2014

[mikrovolt]

The bible's creation account explains that matter was created first.
(The elements made up of sub entities bound together with energy.)
next God creates light. The day and night which are directional.
( Light is EM )

Gravity, I feel it is a subset of the above. Recently we heard and saw the
LIGO instrumentation record for the first time the thump and the chart.
https://youtu.be/PjubaPZEBDA?t=1966

[bistander]

Deflection

...



Above We are observing SOUTH Facing toward Screen, with TWO CRT's on each SIDE...can clearly see the deflections:

LEFT CRT= ABOVE (POSITIVE) ZEROLINE
RIGHT CRT= BELOW(NEGATIVE) ZEROLINE
...

You yourself called it deflection.

Regards,

bi

Edit: Hi Ufo,

I ceased arguing with you, rotation vs deflection, in the other thread because it's like we speak different language. Seems pointless. You bring it up again so WTF. Here goes.

You were talking about the effect the an external magnetic field has on the CRT. What are the coils on the sides of the tube which control the position of the beam's intersection with the screen? Deflection coils. Right? They function by making a magnetic field which deflects the beam, which is moving charges. The magnetic field from a magnet held close to the screen does the same thing. It deflects the electron beam. Nothing is rotating. Except your perception of the resulting image (scanline) on the screen. You can call it what you want, but it is deflection to me.

Regards,

bi

[ricards]

a Magnetism Discussion or a name calling discussion?..

I don't see a reason why my name should be mentioned and affiliated with someone else..

It seems this thread is more like a "name-calling" thread than and intelligent one..

To UFO,
If you don't want to answer my questions and criticism about the "Enlightened Magnetism", that's fine with me..
just leave my name out of this "relationship" you guys have with bistander.
when you ran out of logical explanations.. just say so.. you don't have to have all the answers..

[Ufopolitics]

To UFO,
If you don't want to answer my questions and criticism about the "Enlightened Magnetism", that's fine with me..

Hello Ricards,

I believe that -so far- I have been answering all your questions-doubts...haven't I?

just leave my name out of this "relationship" you guys have with bistander.

The only reason why your name was next to bistander's, is because you both completely DENY to observe a Partial Spin-Rotation on CRT Scanline Plane.

That's all.

when you ran out of logical explanations.. just say so.. you don't have to have all the answers..

Whenever I can't find an explanation...I go back to my experiments...they... most of times... show me the correct way or the answer.


Take care


Ufopolitics