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

[Gambeir]

Magnetic vortex demo.
[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV8DqMBzkIc[/VIDEO]

[bistander]

My interpretation

Magnetic vortex demo.
[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV8DqMBzkIc[/VIDEO]

The liquid is full of charges. The bubbles cause the liquid to flow upwards along the magnet. When the upwards moving charges encounter the static magnetic field curving outward from the top magnet pole, a force is imparted on the charge and mass (liquid) carrying the charge. The direction of the force is tangential around the magnet causing rotation in the liquid, not rotation of the magnetic field.

I think everybody has seen whirlpools of draining water in sinks, tubs and toilets. Obviously gravity is the force pulling water downward. However it is illogical to infer that the gravitational field is a vortex. Other forces act in conjunction with gravity causing whirlpools. Just like here. Other forces act in conjunction with the magnetic field to cause the vortices.

bi

[Markoul]

A genuine Observation

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.

That is:

What will you get if you take the below picture,

https://drive.google.com/file/d/18E7...ew?usp=sharing


split it in half and the turn each individual iron filing 90 degrees* from its initial position, accordingly on either half of the image?

You will end up with 2 circles (toroids), one on each pole of the magnet touching back to back at the middle!

Exactly the 2D version of the image of the field we get with the ferrocell when showing the side view of the magnet.


Emmanouil

*as we have seen by experiment iron fillings orient themselves always 90 degrees perpendicular to the Bloch axis middle of a magnet due their very low magnetic reluctance whereas a magnet (e.g. superparamagnetic ferrofluid) placed side by side with and another magnet orients always in parallel with the Bloch axis and the fields coincide and align geometrically. Therefore we can say the ferrofluid in the ferrocell makes an exact copy of the field of the magnet it is inducing. Furthermore nanoparticles in ferrofluid exhibit superparamgnetic behaviour meaning the act like single domain therefore can follow and copy tangent to the force vectors of the field any magnetic flux line trajectory.

[bistander]

Cut in half and twist thousands of particles 90°

So it appears that you agree with me. The ferrocell media aligns perpendicular to the magnetic field therefore the resulting image is not that of the magnetic field but of some other attribute associated with the field such as equal potential profiles.

Why is it so difficult to believe the compass needle or sliver of iron aligns to the magnetic field? Isn't that supposed to happen? Why don't those compass needles point East and West?

Regards,

bi

[Gambeir]

The liquid is full of charges. The bubbles cause the liquid to flow upwards along the magnet. When the upwards moving charges encounter the static magnetic field curving outward from the top magnet pole, a force is imparted on the charge and mass (liquid) carrying the charge. The direction of the force is tangential around the magnet causing rotation in the liquid, not rotation of the magnetic field.

I think everybody has seen whirlpools of draining water in sinks, tubs and toilets. Obviously gravity is the force pulling water downward. However it is illogical to infer that the gravitational field is a vortex. Other forces act in conjunction with gravity causing whirlpools. Just like here. Other forces act in conjunction with the magnetic field to cause the vortices.

bi

A manifest demonstration of a magnetic field which appears to be moving and flowing is what is being demonstrated. This case is not yet dismissed. Your hail marry pass is a fail.

The hypothesis of operation you've offered is that the magnetic field is a secondary field induced by moving charge particles even though it's actually a fixed field? Is this what you're attempting to pass as a logical explanation?

Do you see the fail in this logic?

The water is conductive. The field is magnetic. The carrier is a charged water molecule. The carrier is not creating the magnetic field. It is following the magnetic field, not creating it. It is and can only follow the magnetic field. There is no evidence whatsoever that the magnetic field is fixed. Quite the reverse, as the charge carrier is attracted to the magnetic field it is thus following the magnetic. This idea that bubbles are over~riding the power of the fields involved borders on lunacy as the charge carrier and the magnetic field are independent of the chemical breakdown which give rise to the bubbles that are themselves only markers to where the breakdown is happening and thus showing clearly a flow flux in the magnetic field.

There's nothing to support your assumption of operation, nothing, your making radical and dangerous assumptions where there is absolutely no evidence to support such a conclusion. Even if there were, all you're showing is you don't know how to do science since it's your duty not to support your own hypothesis, but to try to disprove it, and if you cannot disprove it then and only then is a workable hypothesis created.

You're doing the reverse which is not applied science. Again, what you've thought proves nothing at all. It isn't even logical. It's forming a tornado, not a curve, can't you even get that much right? Did you even watch the video? Good lord~ Ya know there's a point where being a jackass crosses the line and you've just crossed that line with me in your reply. You're not a scientist and you don't know how to do science. We want to question the existing paradigm here, not uphold the burning of oil until we all go extinct. You're not helping in this regard.

[bistander]

Can you read?

...

The hypothesis of operation you've offered is that the magnetic field is a secondary field induced by moving charge particles even though it's actually a fixed field? ...

Absolutely not. Where did I say that?

This what I said: "When the upwards moving charges encounter the static magnetic field curving outward from the top magnet pole,"

in other words, a curved static (nonmoving) magnetic field. Like shown here:



Image from: EEMAG 1 - Labs

bi

[bistander]

When logic fails, name calling is your method

...Good lord~ Ya know there's a point where being a jackass crosses the line and you've just crossed that line with me in your reply. You're not a scientist and you don't know how to do science. We want to question the existing paradigm here, not uphold the burning of oil until we all go extinct. You're not helping in this regard.

How does a true understanding of magnetism uphold the burning of oil?

Great if you can discover something new. But how do you know what's new when you are blind to what is old?

Must be a conspiracy.

bi

[bistander]

Lorenz force

...
The carrier ... It is following the magnetic field, not creating it. It is and can only follow the magnetic field. ... Quite the reverse, as the charge carrier is attracted to the magnetic field it is thus following the magnetic.
...

Charges do not follow magnetic fields. Nor are charges attracted to magnetic fields. Moving charges react to magnetic fields with a force (and motion unless constrained) which is perpendicular to both the field vector and velocity of the charge. See Lorentz.

bi

ps. Your flying saucers will have a better chance of liftoff if you actually understand magnetics.

[Gambeir]

The problem with your explanations are they don't explain observed facts, they ignore known data, and the preponderance of evidence shows you're mistaken about what creates magnetism as well as how it behaves.

There is nothing else known that remotely suggests anything like you've said could possibly exist. You are the one living in a delusional state of mind. All evidence refutes your absurd hypothesis about a fixed static field and yet you are evidently clueless to that fact. Your absurd explanation shows your knowledge base is blindly narrow and based on outdated knowledge.

The magnetic field is a flexible medium. A magnetic field is the product of energies flowing through some type of a gate. The magnetic field is capable of independent action.

http://www.electrogravity.com/AVCFor...fugalForce.pdf

[Gambeir]

Charges do not follow magnetic fields. Nor are charges attracted to magnetic fields. Moving charges react to magnetic fields with a force (and motion unless constrained) which is perpendicular to both the field vector and velocity of the charge. See Lorentz.

bi

ps. Your flying saucers will have a better chance of liftoff if you actually understand magnetics.

Nobody expects me to know half what I have put together. I've never claimed to be what you have. I'm not claiming to be any kind of expert in this field; you're the one claiming to understand how things work, but the issue is that what you've claimed isn't working to explain observed phenomena and that's the rub you're not getting.

Here you now want me to believe your ideas about magnetism, which are as ridiculous as they are illogical, but I'll give you the benefit of doubt anyways, and so now you go on to say that if only I understood these (failed) ideas, then perhaps I could make a successful flying saucer.

Now how's that logical? If you're the self proclaimed geyser of knowledge in this arena, then you're the one who's supposed to explain the disturbing Black Triangle Voyeurs seen the world over. I'm only here because your science can't and isn't doing that. Yet again I'm now opening the front door to the house and having the experience of full frontal exposure with one parked over the house and so now I'm here seeking some logical explanations.

You've been about as helpful in this area as radiation treatment is to a stage four cancer patient: Thanks so much.

I'm not the one who needs to start explaining things logically. You're the one that needs to do that, which you're not doing when you're still claiming expertise in this whole topic. You claim to know and understand yet can do nothing to explain or help anyone with anything other than basic home wiring which is probably where your petrified ideas might best serve others.

[Ufopolitics]

Why is it so difficult to believe the compass needle or sliver of iron aligns to the magnetic field? Isn't that supposed to happen? Why don't those compass needles point East and West?

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Because the iron strictly aligns with iron, FERROMAGNETIC to FERROMAGNETIC, simple.

Iron is NOT PART of a Magnetic Field, iron only serves to amplify field.

Magnetic Fields EXIST without iron.

Needle compasses align with the STRONGEST ENDS of the Magnetic Field...or the POLES...strictly NORTH-SOUTH.

EAST-WEST do not exist...man made fabrications to be used as fake, relative geographical coordinates, based on planetary and Sun rotations...

EAST-WEST are not magnetic polarizations...they are not poles...an invention.

Why when you sprinkle copper powder or aluminum over a magnetic field nothing happens...no "field shape"?

Regards



Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Fe

Hello Bistander,

Because the iron strictly aligns with iron, FERROMAGNETIC to FERROMAGNETIC, simple.

Iron is NOT PART of a Magnetic Field, iron only serves to amplify field.

Magnetic Fields EXIST without iron.
...

Of course magnetic fields exist without iron. But they exist with iron in them, or in iron also. Iron will become part of the magnetic circuit, or path, and can alter the magnetic field.

Will not a single sliver of iron align with the magnetic field showing it is not only "FERROMAGNETIC to FERROMAGNETIC"?

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Flying saucer field theory

http://www.electrogravity.com/AVCFor...fugalForce.pdf

At a quick review, I see nothing there which refutes my contentions about the experiment. Perhaps you could pull out the specific passages or equations for us.

Regards,

bi

[Markoul]

Is really Earth's magnetic field a magnetic dipole field?

This thread has become so much intensive!

Let's levitate the tension with some brain twister question.

Is really Earth's magnetic field a magnetic dipole field?
Simple question, as the magnetic dipole field of the Earth is generated by its center molten core dynamo effect the magnetic poles field is projected towards the extreme North and South geographical locations with some declination from the central axis.
While I am on a North hemisphere location (excluding the extreme pole locations) North magnetic pole half of the compass needle is attracted towards Earth's magnetic South pole thus Geographic North.
As I am now moving on the opposite direction towards geographic South pole thus the Earth's magnetic North pole, moving across the equator and continuing, at some point and after, attraction of of the Earth's south geographical North magnetic pole should become stronger than attraction of the geographic North South magnetic pole and the compass should flip. The same also should hold true vice versa when moving from south hemisphere to the North hemisphere.
However in both cases this is not happening and compass shows steadily without flipping the N-S Earth's magnetic axis.
video demonstration:

https://youtu.be/ED1wR59W-V8

Why?

Is really Earth's magnetic field a magnetic dipole field?

EM

[Gambeir]

At a quick review, I see nothing there which refutes my contentions about the experiment. Perhaps you could pull out the specific passages or equations for us.

Regards,

bi

There is nothing solid about anything which you can stick your hand through. That's about as simple and fundamental as it gets. You want me to believe that electrons leap about, but not magnetism? You want me to listen to the laws of Issac Newton but somehow use perverted logic to reason out that the magnetic field isn't a product of reactionary forces? Get your science down is what I say. It's one way or the other, but it's not any old way that happens to suit you at the moment, because that's not science it's mumbo jumbo.

Whatever the magnetic field is, it is not a solid object, but this is what you're maintaining. You refuse to acknowledge that this a medium like air or water is a medium, and yet again all available evidence says this is what it is. It's not a brick wall or wire ball, it's a medium and an energy field is a medium.

As a medium it is flexible and capable of moving, and since it's being created out the immediate space around us, it is therefore a natural state of nature which must exist all around us and the air around is also a medium.

All available evidence shows that this substance can be condensed out of the immediate space by using two known methods, one being electrical interaction through a suitable conductor, and the other by natural forms of crystalline structures, both of which result in a magnetic field and both of which appear to follow basic laws of physics. That is, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

For the magnetic field to form and to spontaneously sprout forth from either a natural or man made magnet it must be explained by moving energy being formed out of our immediate surroundings. This is the same thing we do with other known gases and that is to condense them out of the immediate space around us. This is all a magnet is doing as well, it is a crystalline formation whose qualities of matter are conducive to the production of a magnetic field. That's the very foundation of a magnet. Obviously the organization of the crystalline lattice bonds form some kind of gateway through which energies pass that form a magnetic field. This is not a difficult process to imagine happening, it's not unlike air passing through a windmill, it's just another form of energy passing through a structure which resulting in a reaction, that reaction being a magnetic field.

If the magnetic field were purely the product of electrical interactions it would cease to exist without them otherwise you have a fundamental violation of basic laws of physics going on, but disregarding this angle it's already established that the magnetic field becomes a functional medium independent of the space which it was born from and behaving as though it were akin to oil in water and maintaining a separate space to itself. That is the action of a medium and a condensed matter.

There is no other possible way to explain this field forming, and once formed it behaves as a medium able to flow and move on it's own independent of the space around it and independent of the methods which created it.

Whether or not this condensed material we call magnetism is taken back up or dissolves back to the surroundings it was condensed out of is unknown to me, and probably everyone else, but it does exist and move about as a condensed medium for some unknown period of time. This has now been repeatedly stated by various researchers.

The fact that the magnetic field is doing this, capable of doing this, shows it is not like electrical energy, it is clearly not fixed, and it's movements show it is more like a fluid. It is clear that we do not understand what it is. We only seem to understand how to create it, and we only seem to have some rather vague ideas about how to control it, and virtually no one has evidently ever considered monitoring the local environment for what now appears to reasonable notions that various blobs of magnetic flux may be wandering about disrupting this, that, or the other thing. Like say perhaps causing some poorly thought out vehicles to lose control, or to have their accelerators go haywire, or any other number of relatively unexplained disasters.

Hence the reason I'm pissed off at your refusal to advance with everyone else to a new awareness about the state of nature you're actually living in.