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

[Ufopolitics]

A Really "Nut" Opinion...

I think the idea of field lines is total rubbish anyway.
The best guess I have is that the field strength would
act in accordance with the inverse square law so
tbe ferrocell images are useless.
John.

And I think you have not written here nothing like the above which really portraits and goes more in accordance with your name.

Now I am fully convinced you DO are completely nuts.

Therefore we do not need here "Nuts Opinions", they will get us nowhere...but into more confusion.

The subject is complex as it is in a perfectly smooth conversation, without "nuts opinions"...


Ufopolitics

[Markoul]

You are right on that flux lines are imaginary mathematical construction showing motion therajectory under the influence of magnetic force lines of any point origin in 3D space.

So in reality magnetic field resembels actually a solid 3D object in space essentially spherical in nature.

So you can say field of magnet consists of infinite numbers of flux lines since there is infinite number of points in space of influence of a magnet...

Nevertheless the good stuff with the ferrocell is because it is using point light sources thus LEDs and magnetic field appears on the ferrocell wherever intense light is shined upon, it can depict the actual flux lines and therefore show a wire-frame of the field!!

This is important when studying the field because of the counter skew angles of the flux on the different oposite poles of the magnet we can observe the counter rotational geometry on the N and S vortex-toroid field of a magnet.

Also notice that in contrast with transverse EM waves, static field strength of magnet reduces with distance not with the inverse square law but with the inverse cube law.

[Markoul]

Now I am fully convinced you DO are completely nuts.

Therefore we do not need here "Nuts Opinions", they will get us nowhere...but into more confusion.

The subject is complex as it is in a perfectly smooth conversation, without "nuts opinions"...

sorry but I can't help it... I have to LOL here... although I must confess I like nuts!

[Ufopolitics]

Dear Ufopolitics,

I couldn't agree more with you on that and you said it wonderfully . However I must say this "lowest potential" term brings confusion. In the ferrocell but as well CRT the flux trajectories closer to the body of the magnet are actually the highest potential of the field (it is well known fact in physics that the strongest field vectors are the shortest in distance from the source). As you go further in distance from the magnet, flux lines shown represent lower potentials of the magnetic dipole field. The magnetic field strength as you know for the far field is diminishing with distance with the inverse cube law for a dipole magnet.

Understand, that field of magnet consists of many of these layers or shells of flux like an onion filling completely the 3D space around a magnet and its radius of influence.

Ferrocell is not showing lowest or highest potential shells of magnetic field but because it is a single 2D surface in space every time depending its distance from the magnet, one slice only or shell of the 3D magnetic field is magnetically projected on the 2D surface of the ferrocell. And by meaning surface of the ferrocell I am not referring to the glass but to the the microns thin film of ferrofluid encapsulated inside the ferrolens (i.e. two glasses of ferrocell).

Hope, this clarifies things.

Kind Regards,

EM

Hello Markoul,

First, just one healthy recommendation...please do not waste your time and energy with Nuts People here...there are plenty...just IGNORE THEM, trust me...is the best way to keep going forward...

Now getting back into the discussion...IMHO, lower and higher magnetic potentials is not referring to be closer or further away from the magnetic source (that is understandable and non debatable from my end)...but instead it refers to all the curved lines and the spaces "in between".

When we set a magnet in a color CRT, that previously we have set screen to FULL WHITE...Magnetic Field different force gradients (lo-mid-hi) brakes the White Light Spectrum according to the different potentials into the RGB Colors...while the areas which remains in white...are all those of lower potential.

Why?...simple, magnetic forces are not strong enough to disperse the white light into scattered colors on those areas.

Now, when we set magnet in Ferrocell, the opposite to above Color CRT takes place...meaning lower potential areas are the darkest ones.

Remember that even within the outlined by brighter color curvilinear higher potential forces... we have gradients of centrifugal plus centripetal forces, so, even at this higher levels, we have hierarchies according to their traveling paths...even though it is the same circular portion of the Two 3D Sphere.

Now, related to 2D and 3D...

Remember that a 2D Plane, could -easily- project a 3D Imaging!!...this is not new...all 35mm Film in a 3D MAX Projector...is a 2D FRAME Celluloid 35 or 70 mm Film.

Ferrocell blocks the light to Lower Field Potential Areas, allowing you to ONLY see the Higher Field Potential Side...by allowing light to pass through forming an Image to the viewer (same as a Camera does)


Hope you understand me better now.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Markoul]

Ufopolitics,

Thank you for your advise and tuning me in your thoughts and your expert opinion.

I fully understand now and agree.

Also I was I admit absolute about the 2D surface of the ferrocell of course it is not mathematically a 2D surface and has a depth on it therefore it is also allowing us to extract some depth of field information as I previously stated in my posts and you perfectly described.

Best Regards,

EM

[Ufopolitics]

An important test not shown...The Dark Side of the Moon.

Hello to All,

I will go over the two videos which were presented before...related to Magnetic Fields deflecting E-Beam from a CRT.

1- The First video:

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18-QdfoLBVk&feature=youtu.be[/VIDEO]

2- Second video below where CRT Tube is clear and we can clearly see the beam deflection is semi-round (curvilinear, I call it) and never straight angular (90º):

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=11s&v=RqSode4HZrE&app=desktop[/VIDEO]

On first video, the professor shows an arrow attached to magnet, where direction of arrow is where NORTH Pole is.

Now on both videos, both professors approach North to LEFT SIDE OF CRT, then go on top of CRT where beam deflects to the LEFT, (which makes perfect sense...since it is exactly same deal as when magnet is approached from left side...except with "screen rotated"...Then both go at LEFT ANGULAR Approach...and so beam deflects as "expected"...always in the 90º angle RELATED TO the DOT TRAVELING PATH (WHICH IS NOT THE ACTUAL BEAM DEFLECTION)...but that is NOT the point here...

What I wonder why, Is that none of the two teachers, show A NORTH APPROACH FROM THE RIGHT SIDE OF CRT TUBE ?

Yes, and I mean same "arrow" pointing NORTH to beam as on left side...same height (center, same height as beam)...but approaching from RIGHT SIDE?

Maybe some of you do not know where beam would deflect...if that same NORTH POINTING ARROW, approaches BUT, from the RIGHT SIDE of the CRT-BEAM?

Now, the "Right Hand Rule" explains this deflection from the Left Side with beam deflecting down on second video (2:45)...and our hands thumb points up...so force is wrong...but, hey, electron is charged negatively (-)...so force goes the "opposite way" as our thumbs are pointing to...so, ok that's fine, is ok.

Then as concluding this "hand dilemma", right hand rule is used for positively charged particles...not electrons, which are negatively charged, so force is at opposite of the thumb direction.

So, now let's approach magnet's NORTH from the RIGHT SIDE of CRT Beam...and what happens?...do you think beam would deflect downwards as well?...same way as when NORTH was approached from LEFT SIDE?

Sorry, but beam would deflect UPWARDS, when we approach SAME NORTH POLE, but from the RIGHT SIDE of the E- BEAM.

Now, sorry, but how do we use our "Right Hand" here ? ...Do we have to actually "brake" our middle finger to bend in the Field direction?...but still...our Thumb will still point upwards...and according to previous conclusion...we have to revert the direction of Thumb...right?...because is a "negatively charged particle"?

Then according to all the above...our right hand will not serve to understand this North-Right approach...use our left hand then?

Still, with left hand our thumb points UP, and it should be reversed...still is same electron negatively charged right?

Concluding...it is better not to "confuse students" and ONLY Approach Magnetic Forces from the Left Side of CRT Tube...


If you Bistander could explain it...please be my guest...



Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Hand job

Hello to All,

I will go over the two videos which were presented before...related to Magnetic Fields deflecting E-Beam from a CRT.

1- The First video:

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18-QdfoLBVk&feature=youtu.be[/VIDEO]

2- Second video below where CRT Tube is clear and we can clearly see the beam deflection is semi-round (curvilinear, I call it) and never straight angular (90º):

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=11s&v=RqSode4HZrE&app=desktop[/VIDEO]

On first video, the professor shows an arrow attached to magnet, where direction of arrow is where NORTH Pole is.

Now on both videos, both professors approach North to LEFT SIDE OF CRT, then go on top of CRT where beam deflects to the LEFT, (which makes perfect sense...since it is exactly same deal as when magnet is approached from left side...except with "screen rotated"...Then both go at LEFT ANGULAR Approach...and so beam deflects as "expected"...always in the 90º angle RELATED TO the DOT TRAVELING PATH (WHICH IS NOT THE ACTUAL BEAM DEFLECTION)...but that is NOT the point here...

What I wonder why, Is that none of the two teachers, show A NORTH APPROACH FROM THE RIGHT SIDE OF CRT TUBE ?

Yes, and I mean same "arrow" pointing NORTH to beam as on left side...same height (center, same height as beam)...but approaching from RIGHT SIDE?

Maybe some of you do not know where beam would deflect...if that same NORTH POINTING ARROW, approaches BUT, from the RIGHT SIDE of the CRT-BEAM?

Now, the "Right Hand Rule" explains this deflection from the Left Side with beam deflecting down on second video (2:45)...and our hands thumb points up...so force is wrong...but, hey, electron is charged negatively (-)...so force goes the "opposite way" as our thumbs are pointing to...so, ok that's fine, is ok.

Then as concluding this "hand dilemma", right hand rule is used for positively charged particles...not electrons, which are negatively charged, so force is at opposite of the thumb direction.

So, now let's approach magnet's NORTH from the RIGHT SIDE of CRT Beam...and what happens?...do you think beam would deflect downwards as well?...same way as when NORTH was approached from LEFT SIDE?

Sorry, but beam would deflect UPWARDS, when we approach SAME NORTH POLE, but from the RIGHT SIDE of the E- BEAM.

Now, sorry, but how do we use our "Right Hand" here ? ...Do we have to actually "brake" our middle finger to bend in the Field direction?...but still...our Thumb will still point upwards...and according to previous conclusion...we have to revert the direction of Thumb...right?...because is a "negatively charged particle"?

Then according to all the above...our right hand will not serve to understand this North-Right approach...use our left hand then?

Still, with left hand our thumb points UP, and it should be reversed...still is same electron negatively charged right?

Concluding...it is better not to "confuse students" and ONLY Approach Magnetic Forces from the Left Side of CRT Tube...


If you Bistander could explain it...please be my guest...



Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

Seems simple to me.

Case 1: N pole approaches from left side, beam deflects down.

Case 2: N pole approaches from right side, beam deflects up.

The magnetic field changed direction; in case 1, B vector points to the right. In case 2, B vector points to the left. So the deflection is opposite between case 1 and case 2. Right hand rule works in both cases without breaking any fingers.

Regards,

bi

BTW. In 2nd video, at 1:01, he flips the magnet and the S pole approaches from the left. The beam deflects upwards. Here he has reversed the B vector just the same as approaching with N from the right side. The right hand rule still applies.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

Seems simple to me.

Case 1: N pole approaches from left side, beam deflects down.

Case 2: N pole approaches from right side, beam deflects up.

The magnetic field changed direction; in case 1, B vector points to the right. In case 2, B vector points to the left. So the deflection is opposite between case 1 and case 2. Right hand rule works in both cases without breaking any fingers.

Regards,

bi

BTW. In 2nd video, at 1:01, he flips the magnet and the S pole approaches from the left. The beam deflects upwards. Here he has reversed the B vector just the same as approaching with N from the right side. The right hand rule still applies.

Thanks Bistander,

However, realize that the "Right Hand Rule" is just a "Reference Guide" to help people predict where beam would deflect...but it does not tells Us WHY is this BEAM DEFLECTION in such fashion?

Lorentz shows the Three Axis all in square angles...x,y.z...and so uses all 3 to dispose F , B and qV, but like I wrote previously in another post, BEAM NEVER DEFLECTS in SQUARE ANGLES, but in a CURVILINEAR FASHION, which is very smooth WITHOUT ABSOLUTELY ANY RADICAL, SQUARE ANGLES.

Obviously Lorentz Force is calculated based on the DOT DISPLACEMENT ON SCREEN...and NOT BY REAL BEAM DEFLECTION SHAPE, which is completely CURVED, CURLED...

Now, please take a look at video below [previously uploaded by Mikrovolt] (is only 1:58 total) and basically watch BEAM DEFLECTION by pausing frame at minute 1:48

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orsMYomjwIw&feature=youtu.be[/VIDEO]

In this nice hardware CRT...he is able to DEFLECT BEAM at a PERFECTLY CIRCULAR ARC (more than 180º)...

Now, please tell me at which ANGLE is beam deflecting in that frame?...is it a square angle?

Do you see squares anywhere during the whole deflection?

Now scroll back to frame 1:00...almost a FRONTAL APPROACH TO BEAM there (yes, there is a slight angle, but slightly a 2 or 3 degrees)...and play to see what Beam does...

This is what I refer to when approaching straight (zero angle) that beam does, but only at certain distance from screen.

I will post some drawings about this on next post.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Dual CRT'S, Dual E-Guns...

Ok, now...

Let's say I have put together TWO Beam Guns aiming OPPOSITE at 180º...within Two Screens...yeah, crazy idea, I know...but something like shown below:



Now on image below, when we approach a North Pole (same B Field for both CRT simultaneously) we see the BEAM DEFLECTIONS taking place and please, let's forget about dot traveling path, and concentrate ONLY ON BEAM DEFLECTION SHAPE.

Now, say that I have same hardware as shown on previous video (I can only wish )...a larger CRT Tube, but also with Dual Guns...and I will apply same deflection force as He did at frame 1:58...but for TWO Simultaneous Beams...we will have something like shown below:



And so, we will end up with exactly TWO SEMI-CIRCLES for that NORTH POLE...A very, very similar type of Curvilinear Geometry as we all see on Ferrocells...except Ferrocell Lens will show all Curves involved in one single pole...while here we only have two Guns to reveal two curvilinear vectors of force...PLUS, as Markoul mentioned before...Ferrocells would also show the overlapped LOWER POLE (South in this case) at bottom of image.

Now, if we would have multiple Electron Guns...with same NORTH POLE We will have an image like shown below:



Doesn't it looks like what Ferrocell shows Us for ONE SINGLE POLE? (without Bottom Pole Overlapped.)


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Iamnuts]

Screenshot_2018-05-06-23-43-13.jpg

[bistander]

90°

Hi Ufo,

Regarding the 90° displacement or deflection, you have that confused with force in the Lorentz equation. Lorenz says nothing about the resulting displacement, only the force acting on the moving charge including the direction of said force. F = qV × B. The vector cross product "×" is a maximum at 90°, or as they call it, an orthogonal relationship, meaning the 3 vectors are all at right angles to each other. It does not mean or imply the charge changes direction by 90°. In fact, that would require an infinite force.

Continuing to your next post, all those circles and arcs are paths of the charge and not the magnetic field. Throughout your development, your magnetic field is static, or remains constant, represented by that big blue arrow. I say the same thing happens in the ferrocell. The magnetic field is static (non-moving, non-flowing) and causing something else to make the circular images, like moving charges, or photons, or, as I saw one hypothesis, a resonance in the medium.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

Regarding the 90° displacement or deflection, you have that confused with force in the Lorentz equation. Lorenz says nothing about the resulting displacement, only the force acting on the moving charge including the direction of said force. F = qV × B. The vector cross product "×" is a maximum at 90°, or as they call it, an orthogonal relationship, meaning the 3 vectors are all at right angles to each other. It does not mean or imply the charge changes direction by 90°. In fact, that would require an infinite force.

Hello Bistander,

Well, the three vectors are set exactly as any other 3D Grid axis x,y,z...all at 90, nothing new to it...except they apply all this parameters to this axis...

I have clear that -as you wrote above in bold- "ONLY the Force (F) acting on the moving charge, including the direction of said force."...Now, the moving charge q has a velocity V...BUT ALSO carries a VECTOR DIRECTION, which is not stated on formula except by a small arrow on top of qV, however on CAD Graphics it is perfectly set as a Vector on an axis.

Now, I have a simple question about my previous drawing, now below by itself:



On above image we have Two CRT Guns, meaning Two "qV" set linearly but opposed in directional vectors by 180º, I called them V1 & V2

Now, the Field Vector B, is ONLY ONE on this experiment...orB...HOWEVER, this only vector B can generate at the same MOMENTUM, TWO OPPOSITE FORCES...which I call F1 & F2...which - I believe- are of exactly same intensity but of opposite vectors directions...Then we could also name them as F1 and -F1.

How could we justify in that Lorentz Equation, that just one B Field Vector (B) is generating simultaneously two opposite forces (F1 & F2) in two particles q(V1) & q(V2)?

Continuing to your next post, all those circles and arcs are paths of the charge and not the magnetic field.

That is very simple to write it down on paper Bistander...but not to prove it.

Have in mind that "those paths of the electric charge" are simply the result, the CONSEQUENCE of the Magnetic Field Influence, applying a Force on them, and deflecting their path in a Curvilinear fashion.

Throughout your development, your magnetic field is static, or remains constant, represented by that big blue arrow. I say the same thing happens in the ferrocell. The magnetic field is static (non-moving, non-flowing) and causing something else to make the circular images, like moving charges, or photons, or, as I saw one hypothesis, a resonance in the medium.

Regards,

bi

"Something else" makes those circular images?...where should we all look for that "something else"?

Maybe in Fantasy Magnetism?

Wait a minute...did you write "medium"...a "resonance in the medium"...medium is called the Aether...are you now resourcing to the Aether for answers about those circular magnetic lines of Higher Potential?

Unbelievable the things we read here...

I am now for sure that you are running out of classic proof from "out there"...

Why don't you finally give up...recognize there is absolutely "no where to go"...



Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Twist

Hi Ufo,

Always twisting my answers.

Medium as in the ferrofluid.

The whole space is filled with the magnetic field. Each point in the volume, medium, ferrofluid has an unique B vector to interact with the unique V velocity vector on every charge q in the electron beam.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Where to look

...

"Something else" makes those circular images?...where should we all look for that "something else"?

...

Hi Ufo,

You might start looking in the literature out there. I think Michael Synder has a number of very good papers on the subject. Below are a few of his ideas on what causes the circular images.

Ferrofluid is a fluid containing dispersed nanoscale magnetic particles. Each particle is a single magnetic domain which is colloidally stabilized to prevent agglomeration. In other words, each ferrofluid particle has a magnetic moment and either coulombic or steric repulsion to stop them from clustering together.

The ferrofluid cells are simple instruments in the sense that they only have three moving parts. The first moving part is the ferrofluid particles, free to rotate in three dimensions and to move within the limited volume of the cell. The second moving part is the photons that travel throughout the cell. The third moving part is the virtual photons that make up the magnetic fields that interact with the ferrofluid particles.

The first hypothesis is that the ferrofluid medium is the primary reason for the light paths seen in cells. The act of applying an external magnetic field supplies energy to the medium and allows it to form a complex liquid crystal lattice. Photons play a passive role and merely follow the created channels within the self-assembled structures.

The second hypothesis is that the ferrofluid medium is a primary reason for the patterns seen in the cells, but also that the photons are active participants within the cell. Photons of left-handed and right-handed polarizations can pick different paths through the magnetically induced liquid crystal.

The third hypothesis is that the medium does not form a liquid crystal but each molecule in the liquid has a magnetic moment and the external alignment of the molecules can influence the direction of the photons within the medium without being part of a lattice. Each molecule has the freedom to act as an independent lens and molecule to molecule relaying of light can literally cause photon paths within the cells to be circles.

The fourth hypothesis is that the virtual photons are the primary reason for the photon paths seen in the cell. The large amount of virtual photons flowing through the cell aligns the ferrofluid particles for the smallest amount of their cross-sectional area. The instrument acts as a photon bubble chamber in the sense that the medium is saturated with photons. When a channel is formed by the virtual photons, then the opportunistic photons simply travel in the created paths. Thus, the observed Stern–Gerlach separations are properties of the virtual photons.

Once a pathway was formed in the preceding hypotheses we could assume the ferrofluid particles would have a refractive index less than one; because this is a common property for many metals. Applying Snell’s law to the metal lined pathways would result in total internal reflection along their length.

Observation of the resulting images suggested that the lines were most likely isopotentiallines of a scalar magnetic potential.

From:
Photonic Dipole Contours of Ferrofluid Hele-Shaw Cell
by Michael Snyder and Jonathan Frederick,[1] Department of Engineering and Physics, Murray State University.

I don't pretend to know "all" about ferrofluids or ferrocells, but I do know what magnetic fields look like.

Regards,

bi

[mikrovolt]

"Basically we have created many millions of "slits" that have the freedom to self-align with the lowest potential of the field."
I have great respect for Timm, he's a good researcher. Sometimes things discussed are not particularly from his point of view.
The above quote is important because of the" self align with the lowest potential
of the field" this is happening in 2d although it might appear as in a gas.
We need to look at the field from any particular point in space, with a compass
although the needle assumes the lowest possible state the pivot point is FIXED.
The earth is in essence a magnet so show me how to view that field and get
the results you get from a cell.
NASA is studying magnetic reconnection, its very interesting and worth a look.
John.

A mathematical plain cuts a field. It is perpendicular. It is what is being used. It has been declared, it meets the criteria what is defined a uniform field.
There are different levels that visits here so it is clear everyone who tries can have a basic understanding, nothing personal. Simple approach to Reconnection:

Mr. Nutz here is the UCLA study on reconnection.
UCLA BPPL - Magnetic Field Anhilation

We have the field of the two Helmholtz coils and around that is plasma.
I like the out of plane and the probe simulation of the islands.
I am not relating this to ferro cell. Why might I want to do that ?