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

[bistander]

Viewing magnetic fields

Here is an interesting article on the subject including ferrocells by K & J who know magnets.

https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp?p=light-viewer

What are the lines of light in this DIY Ferrocell?

If they’re not lines of flux, what are they showing? The answer seems to be a bit more complicated. As if understanding magnetism wasn’t complex enough, this device adds some crazy optical effects through a fluid. There’s something going on with polarization of the light and how it gets scattered by the nano-sized particles in ferrofluid. We didn’t quite understand 100% of what we read about it, but it seems that some of the effects aren’t yet completely understood. Studies are ongoing.

Each visible line appears as a path of light that comes from each point light source and travels along the path of least potential. We’re not sure what that all means, but it sure does look interesting!

[ricards]

Hello to all,

@Ricards: I have written here many times about what Iron Filings do, and it is very simple to understand it (if you really want to)...It is all very simple COMMON SENSE...but I will repeat it again...and AGAIN...till I turn PURPLE...

Iron Filings shape up exactly as all the iron molecules (ferromagnetics in general) aligned inside the core when a Magnetic Field is present. But they do not -necessarily- represent the TRUE FULL SHAPE of what A COMPLETE Magnetic Field looks like.

Ken Wheeler refers to iron particles shape as the alignment to the higher pressure layers of the field. He further writes that ferrocell, nor view film will NOT capture them as they are higher speed and pressures than Mid Pressure Layers. And I have to admit that this statement is not strong enough, as we will need other means to visualize external HP Layers...so far we don't.

****************************

...


Regards


Ufopolitics

Some Other Facts..

Magnetic Lines of force CAN be "Manipulated" or "Guided".. to wherever is the highest permeability.. very similar behavior to "Electricity" and "conductance".
the very shape of the "Magnetic Field" or the geometry of it is actually "Flexible"..

another argument.. ()
If as you say we shouldn't trust the Iron filings depiction of magnetic field,.. why should we trust the ferocells double hemisphere?.. or the CRT Experiment?.. why?.. if the magnetic field is all so flexible..

Iron filings do not just "align".. first they are attracted. then.. "align".. that's how I see it. same thing too for the ferofluid in a singular plane.
The filings or the fluid, aligns to the "Flux" not inside the core.

again this is all geometry related topics on Magnetism..
nobody points they're attention to the Claimed "Flow" of "Aether" towards counterspace...
the claimed explanation on "Magnetic Attraction"..
yet IMO they are the very foundation of this "New Magnetism"..

this made me think people here also don't believe in this theory also.. and just absorb the "New Model".. all because it made a little sense.

[aljhoa]

I do find those fields interesting and maybe one day
someone will discover how to apply that science and
make it a better world here on Earth.

T'CHALLA REVEALS WAKANDA TO THE WORLD


Al

[mikrovolt]

Demonstration showing that a magnet deflects an electron beam at right angles and straight on has no effect.
https://youtu.be/18-QdfoLBVk

Demonstration of an electron beam in an electric field.
Also when a permanent magnet is pointed less than straight on.
https://youtu.be/orsMYomjwIw

This shows that electrons will deflect at right angles in a uniform magnetic field.
It also demonstrates how a circular motion is possible when a magnet approaches less than straight.

Going further a charged particle in uniform magnetic fied travels in a helix pattern. The radius of the loop and the pitch (the distance between each loop)
can be set by a function. The natural flow in a magnet is conical.

I recommend that this is the correct visual imagery for introducing the electric and magnetic component's relationship
with respect to a permanent magnet.

[Iamnuts]

I http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...644862bba0-jpg
That’s what I think.
The force line just goes straight through then you get Rayleigh scattering
or some such thing.
The field must be viewed from a three dimensional point of view.

[Ufopolitics]

Plain and Simple Bad Experimenting....

Demonstration showing that a magnet deflects an electron beam at right angles and straight on has no effect.
[VIDEO]https://youtu.be/18-QdfoLBVk[/VIDEO]

The above video shows exactly what I call Bad Experiments CONCLUSIONS due to wrong conceptual observations, too superficial analysis, which obviously leads to the VERY WRONG KNOWLEDGE TEACHING!!...
And that's the kind of "scientific knowledge" we all have been tought for 200 years.

Nope, there is absolutely NOT RADICAL STRAIGHT ANGLES (90°) on above electronic beam deflection.
The experiment is using the projected dot traveling path on screen to "see" the angle of deflection...and that is simply, plain wrong!!

The Electron BEAM DEFLECTION can NOT be observed/calculated (Much less concluded) based on the projected dot TRAJECTORY on Screen Plane, but by looking at the BEAM ITSELF CURVILINEAR DEFLECTING PROFILE-ANGLE(S).

Whenever we do it that way, only then we realize that beam deflection is a SOFT/SMOOTH CURVED DEFLECTION...PLUS, ANGLE VARIES ACCORDING TO FIELD APPROACH TO BEAM...IT MAY START AT 1°...ALL THE WAY TO LIKE 60° OR LESS (VERY SMOOTHLY)...BUT Screen size will NEVER allow BEAM TO BEND IN STRAIGHT 90°.

Again this is all about analyzing BEAM DEFLECTION.

Also I FULLY disagree that a STRAIGHT APPROACH DOES NOTHING.
It just depends on FIELD proximity PLUS STRENGHT.

I have done that frontal experiment MANY TIMES and there is a point, when beam starts a. PERFECTLY CIRCULAR MOTION...very small circular diameter...but very clearly observed of course..

You all could do it in your labs...simple experiments...but very wrong interpretations.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Crt

I think this video shows it clearly:

[VIDEO]t=11s&v=RqSode4HZrE[/VIDEO]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=11s&v=RqSode4HZrE.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

I think this video shows it clearly:

[VIDEO]t=11s&v=RqSode4HZrE[/VIDEO]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=11s&v=RqSode4HZrE.

bi

YES!!!

Thanks Bistander

Regards


Ufopolitics

[Markoul]

Unveil the confusion

Hello I_am_nuts [ funny name ] ,

I http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...644862bba0-jpg
That’s what I think.
The force line just goes straight through then you get Rayleigh scattering
or some such thing.
The field must be viewed from a three dimensional point of view.

Do understand what the ferrocell is showing it is actually very easy when you realize:

1) that it is showing a compressed more or less 2D image of the Euclidean 3D field of the dipole magnet with the flux lines of both poles fully interlaced and overlapping.

And...

2) That the iron filings are not showing magnetic field but rather the relative to their position, two magnetic pole spatial locations and actually each iron filing pointing towards the nearest pole, thus point to the strongest two potentials and only, of the field of a magnet, and that actual magnetic field has many different potential values resulting to a flux geometry of two separate vortex toroids back to back at the middle of magnet.

So as soon as you free you mind from the grandpa iron filings experiment and the past and start living in our time everything becomes clear my friend.

I have worked many years (17) in black military projects and believe me the know the truth for magnetic fields. However they deliberately feed the mainstream science and public with a false flag 200 years old experiment to mask the true geometry of magnetic fields because this is the key for free energy as you call it and other technological marvels you can not even imagine.



fig.1 Field geometry of dipole magnet

http://www.ferrocell.us/images/100x8...be%20below.JPG

fig.2 compressed 2D image projection of 3D field wire-frame shown on fig.1 as shown by the ferrocell

If you don't want compresion to happen you need to use a BIG ferrocell like Brian Kerr:

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aRxyRuGP2c[/VIDEO]

Kind Regards,

EM

[mikrovolt]

Bistander,

There is a lot of imperfections in the real world.
You can pick apart any demonstration due to differences in equipment
and many factors that make an experiment less than perfect.
There are always some who struggle with the observation because
there is a chance of inaccuracy with the equation or is it a difference in
equipment. Exact detailed analysis might prove where the problem is.

Permanent magnet domains are not perfectly aligned along with other things just as the angles are not perfectly straight.
The motion of the beam is curved is sufficient to show this general concept using either cathode ray equipment.

You admit there is a circular movement and you stated

" I have done that frontal experiment MANY TIMES and there is a point, when beam starts a. PERFECTLY CIRCULAR MOTION..."

Concern about perfection causes you to lose the scope of the process .

[bistander]

Wrong

Bistander,
...
You admit there is a circular movement and you stated

" I have done that frontal experiment MANY TIMES and there is a point, when beam starts a. PERFECTLY CIRCULAR MOTION..."

Concern about perfection causes you to lose the scope of the process .

I never said that. You're confused.

bi

[Iamnuts]

Ferrocell debate

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Ra...Mie_scattering

[Iamnuts]

ze:

1) that it is showing a compressed more or less 2D image of the Euclidean 3D field of the dipole magnet with the flux lines of both poles fully interlaced and overlapping

Markoul. You're a comedian.

[Ufopolitics]

My Opinion about the Ferrocell...

Hello to All,

@iamnuts, that debate link you have shown is very interesting, thanks!

A Ferrocell is comprised of an ultra-thin layer of ferrofluid sealed between two optically flat glass discs. This normally opaque black liquid is made transparent by reducing the distance between glass discs to a minimum (approx 50 microns).Once the fluid is in this condition, it behaves more like a gas than a liquid... The magnetite particle size average is around 10nm...

Above I have quoted the intro from Timm...from that link .

Some experts in Optics...are debating what type of "scattering" could be applied to the Ferrocell...meaning which one would "apply"...if Rayleigh or Mie...or others

IMHO, as this debate could be useful for the Ferrocell application as to know exactly where it could be classified within the Optical Field of Physics...there are facts which are undeniable when we relate it to the Views they offer whenever under a Magnetic Field influence.

To me, whatever the type of Scattering there would be...Ferrocell Views shows CONSISTENT IMAGING REPRESENTING ALWAYS, THE SAME STRUCTURE on every Magnetic Field which is being observed under the Ferrocell.

Which means that whatever this type of "scattering" be...it is NOT SOME RANDOMLY, UNPREDICTABLE IMAGING...BUT A VERY LOYAL, ALWAYS SAME STRUCTURE...DEPICTING THE SAME GEOMETRY...

And to me, for the purposes of UNCOVERING THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT THE WAY MAGNETIC FIELDS LOOK LIKE...those very consistent imaging of a Magnetic Fields are VERY IMPORTANT.

Plus...it happens that -maybe as a "coincidence"- a Magnetic Viewing Film as a Color CRT Imaging of the Magnetic Field also represents the EXACT, SAME KIND OF GEOMETRY AS THAT OF THE FERROCELL even though they are all different kind of technologies.

But then again...that was just my opinion.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[mikrovolt]

I never said that. You're confused.

bi

Sorry, Bistander I confused UFO's comment about circles. Friday morning late to work. I must have felt it was important enough to reply. In fairness I should omit circular movement all together. I thought your KJ magnetics post was good. The Gauss meter software is a valid comparison. Again it is in addition to the electro-meter not exclusive to only Gauss

The differences in cathode ray equipment is the applied course objective.

Will a university give full credit or equivalence to a student having
passed a class for a navy tech certificate ? The objective is very different
such that repairing navy equipment needs examples of what can go wrong
and the other approach a physics teacher gives a foundation for quantitative analysis.

The mathematical proofs have been scrutinized countless times.
Those who repair or install navy equipment often express views
that can be disruptive in R&R about what they learned as a tech is usually
outside the scope of the parameters being used in the lab.