Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The theories of Frederick David Tombe

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The theories of Frederick David Tombe

    Hi all,

    Tombe published some very interesting articles at:
    Frederick David Tombe

    Like for example the paper "Centrifugal force in the Electric Circuit":
    http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Jou...s/Download/246

    "Abstract. The Lorentz force contains a convective term, v×H. It has been assumed in this series that this term is a Coriolis force. It was shown in an earlier paper that the centrifugal force, grad(A.v), should also be present in the Lorentz force but that it is missing.
    It will now be suggested that the v×H term in the Lorentz force may in fact be the general convective force, and that it refers to the centrifugal force in the irrotational case when it applies to the force that is acting on a current carrying wire, whereas it refers to the Coriolis force in the rotational case when an electric current is induced in a wire that is moving through a magnetic field."

    And "The Aether and the Electric Sea":
    http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Jou...s/Download/241

    "Abstract. The aether alone cannot explain electromagnetism. In order to explain electromagnetism, we need to have a sea of aether vortices. In order to have a sea of aether vortices, we need to have sources and sinks in the sea. These sources and sinks are what we call electric particles and it is the ‘Electric Sea’ of electric particles that shapes the aether into vortices and causes the fundamental hydrodynamical aethereal forces to manifest themselves in the particular guise of electromagnetism.
    The distinction between the aether and the electric sea, and the relationship between them has not been discussed since the time of James Clerk-Maxwell. This paper aims to clarify the relationship between the aether and the electric sea. The gyroscopic solenoidal alignment of the electric sea can reverse a mutually attractive gravitational/electrostatic force into a mutually repulsive electrostatic force. The gravitational and electrostatic forces primarily arise out of pure aether hydrodynamics."


    Interestingly enough, these theories appear to be closely related to Joseph Newmans theories, even though Newman uses somewhat different terminology:

    JOSEPH NEWMAN'S THEORY by Dr.Roger Hastings, PhD

    "Newman began studying electricity and magnetism in the mid-1960s. He has a mechanical background, and was looking for a mechanical description of electromagnetic fields. That is, he assumed that there must be a mechanical interaction between, for example, two magnets. He could not find such a description in any book, and decided that he would have to provide his own explanation. He came to the conclusion that if electromagnetic fields consisted of tiny spinning (gyroscopic) massergies moving at the speed of light along the field lines, then he could explain all standard electromagnetic phenomena through the interaction of spinning (gyroscopic) massergies. Since the spinning massergies interact in the same way as gyroscopes, he called the massergies gyroscopic particles or gyroscopic massergies (a later nomenclature).

    In my opinion, such spinning gyroscopic massergies do provide a qualitative description of electromagnetic phenomena, and his model is useful in understanding complex electrical situations (note that without a pictorial model one must rely solely upon mathematical equations which can become extremely complex).

    Given that electromagnetic fields consist of matter in motion, or kinetic energy, Joe decided that it should be possible to tap this kinetic energy. He likes to say: "How long did man sit next to a stream before he invented the paddle wheel?"

    Joe built a variety of unusual devices to tap the kinetic energy in electromagnetic fields before he arrived at his present motor design. He likes to point out that both Maxwell and Faraday, the pioneers of electromagnetism, believed that the fields consisted of matter in motion. That is stated in no uncertain terms in Maxwell's book "A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field". In fact, Maxwell used a dynamical model to derive his famous equations. That fact has all but been lost in current books on electromagnetic theory. The quantity which Maxwell called "electromagnetic momentum" is now referred to as the "vector potential".

    Going further, Joe realized that when a magnetic field is created, its gyroscopic massergies must come from the atoms of the materials which created the field. Thus he decided that all matter must consist of the same gyroscopic massergies."
    Last edited by lamare; 04-24-2019, 05:38 AM. Reason: updated links

  • #2
    The Double Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field

    The idea that space is filled with tiny vortices has been around at least since the time of the Bernoullis. In James Clerk-Maxwell's 1861 paper 'On Physical Lines of Force' he explains magnetic repulsion between two like magnetic poles in terms of a sea of tiny molecular vortices that are aligned solenoidally such that their rotation axes trace out magnetic lines of force. When two like magnetic poles are brought close together, the magnetic field lines spread outwards in the space between the poles, and they join together laterally. Maxwell believed that the centrifugal force in the equatorial plane of his molecular vortices creates a pressure which causes adjacent magnetic lines of force to push apart from each other, and that this is the cause of magnetic repulsion.

    Joseph Newman appears to have adopted a similar approach to magnetic repulsion, although I haven't studied his theories closely enough to know whether or not he explicitly involves the concept of centrifugal force. Newman's tiny gyroscopic massergies would appear to correspond in principle to Maxwell's molecular vortices even though there are important differences in the two mechanisms.

    However, neither Maxwell's nor Newman's models seem to be altogether clear as regards the mechanism for the force of attraction that exists between unlike magnetic poles. This is where 'The Double Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field' at http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journal.../Download/6371 comes in. By replacing Maxwell's molecular vortices with rotating electron-positron dipoles, we provide a mechansim for tension along the magnetic lines of force. The alternate stacking of electrons and positrons along the magnetic lines of force, in double helix fashion, means that an electrostatic force will render these lines of force into stretched helical springs. When two unlike magnetic poles come close together, the magnetic field lines join directly between the two poles. The tension in these magnetic field lines will then pull the two unlike poles together.
    Last edited by David Tombe; 04-25-2019, 10:21 AM. Reason: updating a link

    Comment


    • #3
      David Tombe: Thanks It Was Fun

      Just finished reading your 2006 update to Double Helix theory etc. What a nice ride. Now I will go back and study it some more, along with some of your links to other Aetherists ( thanks for those).
      Did I infer correctly that your propose magnetic attraction to be inverse square and magnetic repulsion to be inverse cube?
      assume briefly that the physical width of two magnets is very very very small compared to the force of either interaction, and the air gap between the two is very very small

      Why would not the positve to negative interaction of magnet 1 side a with mag 2 side c , overcome the repulsion of mag 1 side b with Mag 2 side c

      see attachment for diagram
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        hit the wrong attachment

        I attached the wrong image, the PDF is Davids original article
        Attached Files

        Comment


        • #5
          Orbital Stability and Earnshaw's Theorem

          NTL01,
          Absolute motion through the sea of tiny dipolar aether vortices induces an inertial pressure. In a radial field, the inertial pressure is asymmetrical and it is manifested as a radially outward centrifugal force which obeys an inverse cube law. Planetary orbital stability is based on the fact that centrifugal force is an inverse cube law force, while gravity is an inverse square law force.

          In a solenoidal field, the inertial pressure is asymmetrical also. It pushes more on one side of the object than the other, hence leading to the compound centrifugal force F = qvxB.

          The centrifugal force is the consequence of pressure in the dipole field, and since magnetic repulsion is due to centrifugal force acting laterally between the magnetic lines of force, then it would be reasonable to suggest that magnetic repulsion is at least closely related to the inverse cube law. The fact that we can have magnetic levitation in a gravitational field would be further evidence towards the idea that magnetic repulsion does not obey an inverse square law.

          Comment

          Working...
          X