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

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

I usually do not check out the credentials or the references where I gather illustrations. I mostly use the images to show what I'm talking about because, unlike you, I am unable to draw to wonderful diagrams on the computer. I do attempt to include the source of the images which I barrow so the reader can see for themselves the original context and investigate further.

Regards,

bi

Bistander,


I see...that you don't check for references...I do, at least I check for ebook (pdf) or site text where they gathered the literature references info from, Author's Bio and education, etc,etc.

For instance, you started shooting a bunch of images from this site below:

UNPh32.6

Then you scroll down to source and we read:

History
The contents of this page is based on "Electricity for Motor Mechanics", by the New Zealand Technical Correspondence Institute
Government Printer, New Zealand.

I was reading about Car Alternators and a bunch of BS was written there, not counting all the misspelled and typos, plus technical huge errors...like the Diodes on a Vehicle Alternator are enough and there is no need for a Voltage Regulator!!...That is big time BS!!...Even old vehicles from the 80's have V Regulators...and All Newer Cars have them as well. And not only that but PROM Computers as well in charge to "regulate" every single operation in veh..

To me, they are not qualified either.

Plus, you are bringing pics from a completely different set up as the ones I have been showing...which is the typical Elementary School empty wire loop rotating within a N-S Magnets (your "Uniform Field")...that is what they teach kids when they are just starting to learn about the basics from electric motors and generators.

To me that is the most ridiculous example ever drawn by anyone, since this closed loop of a single wire does not represent -at all- what any of even the smallest machines look like in real life!!

Plus, you go ahead and build that wire loop between two magnets just to find out it is a completely inoperative model...it is just BS.

My opinions and statements are not only based on randomly chosen pics on line...but also on my own, self paid experimentation, development and analysis...and that is Very Vast!


Where do you think that I have learned to draw like I do?


Do you think I just got an "On-Line Training Course"...or I study this skills on the streets painting with chuck ?!!

Nope, I spend many, many years at University (not Technical Career) but University, taking this courses a very long time ago...which was just part of my Engineering Career.

And I have read and own, not only all English written books...based on Electricity Magnetism and the works...but in Russian and Spanish Books about all kind of machines in this Planet.

But, maybe I am not "qualified" either...


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Bistander,
I see...that you don't check for references...I do, at least I check for ebook (pdf) or site text where they gathered the literature references info from, Author's Bio and education, etc,etc.

Hi Ufo,

So you checked the references for the website below and apparently were impressed with the author's associate degree. Good job there.

Image taken from:POLYPHASE MOTOR DESIGN

(And please, take a good look at that site, and tell me the Author(s) are not "trained" or don't have the experience enough as to post the wrong images and wrong definitions-explanations...please do!)

OK Ufo,

I'd say not too strong of a background or credentials in electric machinery or magnetic theory. Author is an instructor at a technical college specializing in instrumentation and controls. He says on LinkedIn: Specialties: Technical writing, technical instruction, electronic circuit design (including PCB layout), computer programming (C mostly), technical drawing, welding (gas and arc), machine maintenance, basic machine tool operation (metal lathe mostly), curriculum development, public speaking.

With a 2 year degree (ATT) from Skagit Valley College and some time at Perry Technical institute, I'd say his formal education is weak. He may be a fine technician and instructor, but I see nothing (in a quick search) which would qualify him as an expert in magnetic circuits or electric machinery.

bi

To me that is the most ridiculous example ever drawn by anyone, since this closed loop of a single wire does not represent -at all- what any of even the smallest machines look like in real life!!

Plus, you go ahead and build that wire loop between two magnets just to find out it is a completely inoperative model...it is just BS.

And I suppose that your diagram below is an accurate representation and you have built an operative model which looks just like it.

[IMG][/IMG]

Give me a break. Or this next one. It's o.k. because you used 4 turns per coil so it is real.

[IMG][/IMG]

They're just illustrations or examples. You seem to have difficulty grasping the concept of examples and analogies.

And you got all over my case about a week ago saying magnetic fields don't collapse. Then a few days ago I see this from you:

..I just want to tell you one thing...do not Fully Collapse that Field to zero values!!

If You collapse Magnetic Field, ...
<snip>
So, You must leave at least a very small amount of power to that coil, so you do not collapse that Cycloid sequence where all this secret is.


Respectfully


Ufopolitics

You just look for any way you can to put down somebody who disagrees with you. You might try sticking to the subject and proving your point.

Regards,

bi

[Sputins]

Innocent bystander?

@ Bistander.

Why can’t you just allow UFO to explain the topic at hand, an alternative theory and concept concerning magnetism and allow UFO to work up of a solid explanation without the continuous rebuttal from yourself, always referring back to the standard concepts of magnetism?

It’s sometimes helpful to point out the differences, or reference against the standard model, but most of the time it is rather annoying and distracting. (That’s the point of it, isn’t it)?

The standard concepts of magnetism are fully established and are taught in the current curriculum. – It is accepted and understood, (well sort of).

There are alternative theories and concepts that may also explain the magnetic phenomena. So this thread that UFO conceived should have a clear path set fourth, for him to explain what he’s trying to convey to us.

– You’re not being the innocent bistander, you’re standing in the way.

It is similar to the case of the Electric Universe Theory. The resistance by the mainstream to the concept is remarkable (because it will bring down their house of cards). But the EU Theory is growing stronger and stronger with each year with many scientists supporting it, along with the experimental support.

@ UFO, Thank you for your efforts with this thread and explaining things clearly including the use of fantastic graphics & videos. I’m learning from it and I’m sure there are others here doing the same. – Insert words of support here!

Sputins.

[bistander]

@ Bistander.

Why can’t you just allow UFO to explain the topic at hand, an alternative theory and concept concerning magnetism and allow UFO to work up of a solid explanation without the continuous rebuttal from yourself, always referring back to the standard concepts of magnetism?

Because he continually misrepresents the standard electric machine and magnetic theory. I wish he would give up bad-mouthing existing technology and get busy with the topic of this thread. He says he has something better. He should just show us.

All he has to do to get me off his back is answer my questions and prove he has what he claims. Instead he evades giving answers and supporting his statements and claims. He chooses to ridicule, belittle, insult and bully anyone who disagrees with him.
For instance: Did he really need to post #661? Then I wouldn't have posted #662. That would have suited me just fine.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

So you checked the references for the website below and apparently were impressed with the author's associate degree. Good job there.

Yes I did...and yes I did find it "qualified"...and it is not only about the author himself, but who is behind his book as references and literature contributing to the different Chapters like:

David Sweet

Who is David Sweet?

EDUCATION

Ph.D., Physics (Nonlinear Dynamics), University of Maryland, College Park, May 2000.

B.S., Physics/Mathematics, Duke University, Cum Laude May 1995

EXPERIENCE

Quantitative Researcher, Teza Technologies, May 2014-Present.

Desk Head, Quantitative Trader, KCG/GETCO, November 2008-May 2013.

Vice President/Associate Director, Quantitative Trader, Lehman Brothers/Barclay's, June 2004-November 2008.

Co-Founder, Zephyr Financial, January 2003-June 2004.

Quantitative Analyst, Thales Fund Management, June 2000-January 2003.

Graduate Research Assistant, University of Maryland, June 1997-May 2000.

Graduate Research Assistant, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Summer, 1999.

Teaching Assistant, University of Maryland, August, 1996-May, 1997.

NSF Research Experience for Undergraduates, University of California, Irvine, Summer, 1994.

PUBLICATIONS

Papers

D. Sweet, B. W. Zeff, E. Ott, D. P. Lathrop, Three-Dimensional Optical Billiard Scattering, Physica D 154, 207 (2001).

D. Sweet, E. Ott, J. M. Finn, T. M. Antonsen, Blowout Bifurcations and the Onset of Magnetic Activity in Turbulent Dynamos, Physical Review E 63, 066211 (2001).

D. Sweet, E. Ott, T. M. Antonsen, D. P. Lathrop, Blowout Bifurcations and the Onset of Magnetic Dynamo Action, Physics of Plasmas 8, 1944 (2001).

D. Sweet, H. E. Nusse, J. A. Yorke, Stagger-and-Step Method: Detecting and Computing Chaotic Saddles in Higher Dimensions, Physical Review Letters 86, 2261 (2001).

D. Sweet, E. Ott, Fractal Basin Boundaries in Higher-Dimensional Chaotic Scattering, Physics Letters A 266, 134 (2000).

D. Sweet, E. Ott, Fractal Dimension of Higher-Dimensional Chaotic Repellors, Physica D 139, 1 (2000).

D. Sweet, E. Ott, and J. A. Yorke, Topology in chaotic scattering, Nature 399, 315 (1999).

C. R. Hu, S. G. Matinyan, B. Müller, and D. Sweet, Wave Packet Collisions in Yang-Mills-Higgs Theory, Physical Review D 53, 3823 (1996).
Articles

D. Sweet, Andamooka: Open Support For Open Content, Linux Journal 82 (2001).

D. Sweet, A First Look at KDE Programming, Linux Journal 52 (1998).
Books

Lead author: D. Sweet, et. al., Forward by Matthias Ettrich (KDE founder), KDE 2.0 Programming (MacMillan Publishing, November 2000). Available in English, Japanese, Spanish, and German.

Contributing author: Chs. 34-38, N. Wells, Special Edition: Using KDE (MacMillan Publishing, 2000).

PRESENTATIONS

Feedback and Proxy, New York Quantified Self Show & Tell #27 , February 2015.

High Frequency Trading II, Guest Lecture for Trading Strategies and Systems, Prof. Vasany Dhar, NYU Stern School of Business, April 2014.

Pertinacity Demo, New York Quantified Self Show & Tell #25, March 2014.

High Frequency Trading I, Guest Lecture for Trading Strategies and Systems, Prof. Vasany Dhar, NYU Stern School of Business, January 2014.

Long-Term Weight Control, New York Quantified Self Show & Tell #22 , September 2013.

A Short Tour of Wall Street, UMCP SIAM Graduate Student Chapter, October 2003.

Fractal Dimension Of Chaotic Saddles in the Kuramoto-Sivashinski Equation, Contributed Talk, Dynamics Days 2002, Baltimore MD, January 2002.

KDE & Andamooka, NYLUG Monthly Meeting, New York, NY April 2001.

Stagger-and-Step Method: Detecting and Computing Chaotic Saddles in Higher Dimensions, Multimedia Poster, Dynamics Days 2001, Chapel Hill, NC, January 2001.

GUI Programming for Scientists, An introduction to KDE GUI programming in computational and experimental sciences.

Optical Billiards, Applied Dynamics Seminar, University of Maryland, October 1999.

Fractal Dimension of Higher Dimensional Chaotic Repellors, Two talks, Los Alamos National Laboratory, July, 1999.

Fractal Dimension in Higher Dimensional Chaotic Scattering, Poster, Los Alamos National Laboratory Student Association Poster Session, LANL, July, 1999.

Fractal Dimension in Higher Dimensional Chaotic Scattering, Poster, Fifth SIAM Conference on Applications of Dynamical Systems, Snowbird, UT, May, 1999.

Chaos in Everyday Objects, Poster, Maryland Day, University of Maryland, April 1999.

Fractal Dimension in Higher Dimensional Chaotic Scattering, Applied Dynamics Seminar, University of Maryland, July 1998.

Several talks for visiting professors and researchers, 1998-99.

Also, Ben Crowell, another PhD in Physics...Author of the Book "Light and Matter"

You could download a pdf copy at above link, it is free of charge...

This Two Guys above were the ones directly involved in AC/DC Induction plus Electric Motors...go ahead, review them...

You could also visit the Contributor's List then take a look at Credits to Major Contributors...

It happens that this Full Book is also published by All About Circuits website:

Lessons in Electric Circuits

All About Circuits recommendation:

"This free electrical engineering textbook provides a series of volumes covering electricity and electronics. The information provided is great for students, makers, and professionals who are looking to refresh or expand their knowledge in this field."

So, yes, definitively I find this Book highly qualified.

And I suppose that your diagram below is an accurate representation and you have built an operative model which looks just like it.

[IMG][/IMG]

Give me a break. Or this next one. It's o.k. because you used 4 turns per coil so it is real.

[IMG][/IMG]

The Images You have been showing

They're just illustrations or examples. You seem to have difficulty grasping the concept of examples and analogies.

The drawing you have been showing, about an open loop of a single conductor rotating within a N-S Field, that looks like a hollow Barbecue Spatula...will never develop a magnetic field since it is not closed by -at least- just one turn. But its open terminals go directly to contact brushes...However, this is the idea behind it...to take away any concept of a rotational field generated by a closed rotational flow of current.

It is the typical concepts of a "conductor" cutting the "imaginary lies of force" concept...for starting students to go by...then look at what you write, based on your learning from this model:

Hi Ufo,

There is a conceptual difference between how I view magnetic circuit and the way you do. Essentially connecting lines of flux vs spiraling corkscrews. Even though you apparently consider me an avid subscriber of convention on magnetic theory, one place I do deviate is with coil turns. I consider the conductor, not so much the turn, as most do. I think "turns per coil" misleads many.

You do have a big problem in the above underlined and bold letters...

A Closed Turn, a Loop, is a full, 360º rotational flow of current, which is the only way, so far, that we can generate a Spatial Magnetic Field which could interact with other fields building All Electrical Machinery at this point of time.

An Inductor, a Transformer, a Solenoid, plus any electrodynamic machine ever built must have several turns of wire...not just a straight conductor.

And you got all over my case about a week ago saying magnetic fields don't collapse. Then a few days ago I see this from you:

Sometimes We have to use a vocabulary which is understood by all, even though, is not fully correct...precisely when we don't want to waist time explaining about it but getting to the point we are trying to convey.

In that Thread (Allen Burgess), I was specifically talking about the "Collapsing Field" as the main topic of Thread, here I was talking about Cycloids restarting by collapse of field.

I believe everyone understood what I meant.

You just look for any way you can to put down somebody who disagrees with you. You might try sticking to the subject and proving your point.

Regards,

bi

It is not only disagreeing with me, that would be just great if you just did that!!, but your constant rebuttal of everything I write on my Thread or anywhere else on this Forum. And really it is annoying since you keep repeating all my posts, plus you keep filling pages of just randomly searched material, just because it "contains" what you are trying to use against everything I write or post. Consuming a lot of space, which sets the new reader all confused and takes away the main essence of what I am trying to expose.

Isn't that called bullying?

Isn't that called "put down somebody who disagrees with you"?

I am "trying" to "stick" to the subject...You just don't allow me to do it.

Your responses are long and full of images anyone could find easily out there, Images used billion times for over 200 years, same BS.

On the contrary, I bring concepts which are rare to find, New to most...and I used them to reinforce what I am exposing.


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

On-topic

Yes I did...and yes I did find it "qualified"...and it is not only about the author himself, but who is behind his book as references and literature contributing to the different Chapters like:

David Sweet

Who is David Sweet?
<snip>
Consuming a lot of space, which sets the new reader all confused and takes away the main essence of what I am trying to expose.
<snip>
Your responses are long and full of images anyone could find easily out there, ...

OK Ufo, I'll keep this short. You complain that I load the thread with irrelevancy and then devote all that space to David Sweet. I don't see him listed as a reference or contributor to the subject article anywhere. Apparently a very smart man, Dr. Sweet did some research prior to his receiving his PhD in a related field, I guess, MHD. But once obtaining his PhD went to work in finance, even working for Lehman Bros as a senior administrator during the time or time leading up to that company's bankruptcy and SEC litigation. Gotta love him. One of his more recent claims to fame is a presentation Long-Term Weight Control, New York Quantified Self Show & Tell. Please let it go and get back to topic.
bi

[Ufopolitics]

A Conceptual Error that dates back over 200 years...

Hello to All again,


Please, let's look at this Image that Bistander has uploaded previously to "prove his point" against mine:

[IMG][/IMG]

Called: "Developing a Sine Wave" from the site:"MyOdesie.com"

Something wrong in that picture?

Any Errors?

Yes, Definitively...

[IMG][/IMG]

But not big deal...there is an even bigger conceptual error that have been transferred from generation to generation...over and over for over 200 years.

Then Bistander, in the same post, added this two more images of this same wire loop sequence (like it was not enough):

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

Images above He took them from:

http://www.uq.edu.au/_School_Science....html#32.5.6.2

The "thing" is... that ALL above "Sequences" of Images that most of you all are familiar with, and can be found in thousands of thousand of sites...Derives from this Original Image below (this terrible copy taken from the first site with the zero error):

[IMG][/IMG]

Also same graphic from a much better site, with no errors, plus better resolution image:

[IMG][/IMG]

And if we all understand the text below image, it clearly reads:

Voltage over time of sine waveform electricity created when a conductor is rotated through a uniform magnetic field such as in a generator.

It clearly reads "A Conductor", which means just one conductor, or better, ONE SINGLE CONDUCTOR ROTATING THROUGH TIME.... So, it is quite clear that image shows that conductor seeing from above, (so we only see a point) at different positioning of the circle rotation then transferred to a right linear graphic where it matches its Dots Trace for negative-positive values stretched linearly over time.

[IMG][/IMG]

So, when the single conductor passes in front of North Polarization dead center (90º), it generates the peak positive value, then it keeps spinning reaching 180º, and value there is zero...according to rotation then it hits 270º, dead center to South Polarization...and here it gives a Top Negative Value on the sine wave.

It is also understood, this values are read from each end terminals of such single conductor spinning around that Uniform Field.

This is a very simple graphic to understand...but, what have some "brilliant minds" done?

Oh, just look at first sequence images, and notice where the error is...see for yourself what they did...

These "Brilliant Minds", took the happy decision to "join, fuse together" the two conductors separated by 180º rotation through time and gave it that ridiculous shape looking like a Hollow Spatula.

[IMG][/IMG]

This people, did not noticed that it was exactly the same conductor displaced through time at different rotation angles.

From here, many, I mean many more kept showing this nonsense until it became "viral" and has lasted for 200 years...

Other words ...just spinning that Spatula for over 200 years of Time...and teaching the very wrong concepts

Bistander just followed the same viral galloping stampede...like many others across the entire planet...

Ridiculous isn't it?

Now this is a very serious error of interpretation from an original correct and explained graphic...which leads to all kind of wrong conclusions related to Energy Generation Worldwide.

If I were to replace that single wire conductor by A Coil made of conductors...I will just replace it in one single time of rotation position, then spin it through time, just like original graphic did.

[IMG][/IMG]

So, when I take it to the Linear Sine wave displacement over time will look like:

[IMG][/IMG]

It is nonsense to "materialize" the same conductor at two different times of spatial rotation then build the single loop containing two different times.

But they keep defending such wrong concept..over time


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Loop?

...
The drawing you have been showing, about an open loop of a single conductor rotating within a N-S Field, that looks like a hollow Barbecue Spatula...will never develop a magnetic field since it is not closed by -at least- just one turn.
<snip>
A Closed Turn, a Loop, is a full, 360º rotational flow of current, which is the only way, so far, that we can generate a Spatial Magnetic Field which could interact with other fields building All Electrical Machinery at this point of time. ...

Kind of like this, right?



Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4r...Q&feature=plcp

[Ufopolitics]

Kind of like this, right?



Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4r...Q&feature=plcp

Like I wrote before...sometimes I have to use the same vocabulary or the same designs in order for better understanding...since it has been "indoctrinated" for such a long time...that coming with more complex or just different approach will be harder to digest...

But, read my previous post and you will find the big difference between "My Spatula" and "Your Spatula"...

[bistander]

Yes or no?

[IMG][/IMG]

Do you agree with this graphic?

[Ufopolitics]

Do you agree with this graphic?

[IMG][/IMG]

Absolutely!!

And I also have the rotational spinning field applied to each conductor space/time result exactly as in this graphic right linear image...

Be careful what you post!!

I could use it against you in a Court of Law!!

[Ufopolitics]

Do you agree with this graphic?

And...Do you agree with this Graphic below?

[IMG][/IMG]

[bistander]

coil pitch

[IMG][/IMG]

No, because the coil pitch is way off. See the coil pitch here. It is nearly 180°.



Coil pitch shown in your post #660 and explained in your excellent (seriously) reference.

Image above from P 19 of this pdf:PRINCIPLES AND OPERATION OF SYNCHRONOUS MACHINES

bi

[bistander]

Agreed

Do you agree with this graphic?

[IMG][/IMG]

Absolutely!!

That's what I've been saying all along.

[Ufopolitics]

No, because the coil pitch is way off. See the coil pitch here. It is nearly 180°.



Coil pitch shown in your post #660 and explained in your excellent (seriously) reference.

bi

@At All:

Bistander is referring to "Coil Pitch" as the two points where conductors enter (vertically, then perpendicular to Magnetic Field B Vector) through core elements of an Electric Generator...

Bistander,

The Coil Pitch size/angle is given exactly by the approximate size of the Magnetic Field Rotor Pole Face in any given Electric Generator...

Let's please do not jump to bigger machines until we clear the simple Graphic we both agree on.

Ok?

Fine, let's go back and bring that "single conductor" spinning around a uniform magnetic field and the linear sine wave graph next to it please!!


Ufopolitics