The electric field of a magnet

[nueview]

i am good with that.
Martin

[Kokomoj0]

Look at magnet motors when there's too much of a magnetic field pulsing through the iron core it heats up, on a massive scale the iron core of our planet heats up.
A star is mostly metal therefore the whole thing heats up, when the opposite spin directions are pulled into the core we get heat.

what about when its not pulsing

[Kokomoj0]

I thought tesla said mass exerts no energy and can only receive energy from the environment, how did you come to that conclusion?

[boguslaw]

Im not sure you guys completely understand my theory electrons do not come from atoms they come from the aether.
The aether powers atoms just like it does the sun,stars planets,solar system and the galaxy. The atom is not perpetual it is powered by the aether it has a magnetic field just like a star when the aether is pulled into the star by the magnetic field it heats the star so hot it burns the hydrogen and oxygen around it, thats why the main heat reaction is above the stars surface.
The atom is the same, maybe not as a star more like a solar system.
Dave

It's possible. Question: how can we prove it ? I didn't found any satisfactory test. it's all ends up with free electrons in metal and how fast they can be moved.

[MonsieurM]

Im not sure you guys completely understand my theory electrons do not come from atoms they come from the aether.
The aether powers atoms just like it does the sun,stars planets,solar system and the galaxy. The atom is not perpetual it is powered by the aether it has a magnetic field just like a star when the aether is pulled into the star by the magnetic field it heats the star so hot it burns the hydrogen and oxygen around it, thats why the main heat reaction is above the stars surface.
The atom is the same, maybe not as a star more like a solar system.
Dave

I agree...

[petar113507]

As you wish....

Romo, you are better knowledgeable than me on Russell, and i think you understand very well what I am seeing...I leave you the honor to answer nueview
nueview, I hope you don't mind...i will add info if necessary

I am still a student in the work of Russell, but I will do my best to relay my present understanding. It would be my pleasure.
If you have never read Russell before -- which I must assume, I must first give a summary of idea. I will try to summarize some of the nescessary concepts -- but for a better "whole picture" I strongly suggest reading his many works for yourself. I am still in the process of comprehending all of it -- he paints a very "big picture" to understand, but all the peices abide by the same principals.
To add to his general credibillity as a remarkable scientist -- 1926 he predicted tritium, deuterium, neptunium, plutonium -- and sent out his charts predicting these elements to many scientists. Twenty years later, some scientists became inspired by some of his predictions -- such as Hydrogen not being the "1st" element, as is listen on the melendeev periodic table; and began a search which resulted in the finding of heavy water. Likewise for other radioactive elements which fruited some of the elements/refining processes much of the "atomic suicide" power sources we have today. He was not given any credit for predicting these elements -- as well as others stealing his spiral/wave element periodic table structure. Tesla even had high regards for Russell's Cosmogony.
But, Enough of the introduction.

In great conceptual summary of russell's work, Russell says that matter grows through alternating phases of opposite pressure conditions, much like plants grow through alternating heating and cooling of day/night. Matter has a "seed" from which it grows in natural conditions.
Every one of his "18 dimensions" in his work "The Universal One" is a pressure condition.

Matter errects "tonal walls" by balancing the two opposing pressures of a dimension in a "cancelling zone" or "standing wave" to contain the pressures. When a pressure is voided in a lower dimension -- the matter compensates by adding increased potential in a higher dimension.

To translate something that is unfamiliar, I draw upon the familiar knowledge of pressures in the current senses which I understand -- Academia regonizes that there There are different "states" of matter representing a different energy density of that matieral (solid, liquid, gas).
Russell's table shows the growth of each "element/substance" through his tonal octave charts, each representing a different vibrational rate of each element.



Using MM's Cymatics visualization, you can see that different vibrational frequencies will produce different standing wave patterns.
Each increasing "octave" of matter indicates a higher energy density, or "potential". Each inert gas is a "master tone" of each octave -- the stable sphere in form. They are located at the centers of the sinewave periodic table, or at the horisontal equator on his circular chart. Each successive inert gas has a higher potential with a number attached to it -- the "light units" represent the potential energy contained in each successive form.


To my best understanding, Each element is a composite of all 18 dimensions -- how dominant each dimension shows its "effects" in each property of the elements is in each element depends on its vibrating frequency rate.

Sort of how Howard Johnson showed there were different individual "spins" in the permernant magnet -- that a North pole, actually had a south pole spin ALSO present -- I beleive that when referring to the feild of genetics they call the present, but weak south pole a "recessive trait", and the north "dominant".

The red represents contractive, electropositive, the blue, radiative electronegative. The yellow arrows are pointing towards the noble gasses position.
Each element, according to its vibrational "position" on the table of elements in the periodic table has a certain standing wave structure, which we observe to "look like" the element;s atomic structure.
The growth of each element progresses from an "electropositive", contractive on the "inhale" side of the wave. On the charts the electropositive elements are labeled by the "+"
I have flipped the carbon picture on its side, with the yellow arrow pointing towards carbon, so you could see that carbon is an ecliptic plane -- growing from the sphere of a noble gas.

If you were to see that each inert gas is the "master tone" of each octave, or that it holds the "entire potential record" of energy states the octave that each element is in -- you could begin to visualize the "transformation" "growth" or "transmutation". Russell goes over that in his book "Universal one".
Here is a picture of a noble gas sphere. The yellow "line" in the center is a carbon ecliptic. if you can follow the direction of the arrows, you can follow the transition from the inhalation through electropositive (red), to the exhalation of electronegative (blue).

This is an example of two superimposed Russell drawings from "The universal One" to illustrate an element locked in the first potential position. this is for conceptual understanding.


Now, that should be "good enough" to roughly relay why Iron and copper are opposite conductors of each force.

Where its position on his "sinewave" periodic table of elements tells us of some of the the element's dominant characteristics. His circular periodic table, tells us of several different pressures.

Lines to follow -- the elements "motion rates" are determined by where they are "discharging" -- in other words, their magnetic axises.

for instance, this "example" has an electropositive contraction cone that looks to be a little bit "off" from the center rotating axis -- making me guess that it would be something like a 2- element.

What you are asking about, are why/how I can tell that the mid-tones of copper and Iron are preferential conductors of "opposite forces" -- or opposite sides of the wave?
Here are the two charts again:

(From the Universal One)



Now, I know that the "circle" table shows that iron IS electropositive. So, why doesn't it prefer to "conduct" voltage (the electropositive, contracting force), if it IS electropositive itself?

[petar113507]

Now if you're asking "why" as in, which dimensions that those two standing wave formations they are being influenced by/transducing between -- I cannot tell you exactly. I do not know -- that's something I'm still trying to add to my understanding.
But, if you were to ask me how I CAN SEE that they prefer to "conduct" the forces they do?
Russell usually says to "think in light" -- the elements use light as their recording system for their past histories, and their present behaviors.
So, I show you the spectral asorbtionchart of Iron + copper (Thanks alex petty!)

from the asorbtion charts -- the elements are telling me themselves (you've gotta rememeber what those colors mean) -- I can see that the iron is more susceptible to ASORB the EXHALE or "magnetic" force from another element. There is very little red "asorbtion" lines, and so I can see that the element doesn't like to asorb much voltage.
Copper doesn't like magnetism as much as iron (exhale, expansive electric worker), but likes voltage (genero-active, contractive electric worker) more than iron does, by far.
You know how kids have those toys to put in certain shapes in their proper slots? I'm pretty much crudely doing the same thing but with the colors, knowing their general properties.

Same thing with emission. See for yourself which one -- after having asorbed some of "X" potential, which frequency (inhale or exhale) it will conduct the wave to.
The tricky part which I've spent a bit of time staring at spectral emission and asorbtion charts for, is comparing the same position (3+, or 3-) to their previous octaves to see which "light lines" are active in that octave, and which ones are just a record of where the element has been as "history" or "its story".

So again, why does iron EMIT the opposite polarity of what it itself IS? The best I can currently say, is that each half goes through a "zero point" or a "tonal wall of inertia", and reflects off. Kinda like how if you throw a ball at a flat wall at a 45 degree angle, it'll reflect off at the opposite 45 degree angle.

Hope this helps.
MM, Please correct me if I am wrong, or feel free to add anything I missed in my perception.
==Romo

[petar113507]

disclaimer: spelling

Dave, the solar system analogy is very accurate in regards to the atom.

Atoms in systems, in a fractal universe would also be fractal
==Romo

[MonsieurM]

centripetal energy is the basis of life whereas centrifugal energy is the basis of decay and destruction.

V. Schauberger

[nueview]

i want to thank you all for all the material posted i need to read through it all.
something just seems to be off from what i have seen so perhaps i should keep going the way i was going and see were it takes me.
Martin

i was looking at dale ponde's studies and what he has found.

[MonsieurM]

Good to read you Dave, could you have a look at my last post on the Golden Tractate Thread , let me know what you think

also your image applies as well to the following

[nueview]

this at least fits what schauberger said energy does not make right angle turns.
it is also similar to the n-machine lots of spinning charge but no voltage.
it is like a puzzle what keeps track of the coming and going which is generating the magnetic field because the magnetic field is a dipole but charge can be seperate but move as a dipole action.
i am doing a poor job at this so will stop.
Martin

[nueview]

sorry for the spam
but i am trying to get out an idea stuck in my head to you the one thing all the planets have in common is there spin wether they have a magnetic field or not from a major iron core or not they all have spin so dipole charge spin alone can occur the magnetic seems to be a seperate structuring action.
Martin

[MonsieurM]

sorry for the spam
but i am trying to get out an idea stuck in my head to you the one thing all the planets have in common is there spin wether they have a magnetic field or not from a major iron core or not they all have spin so dipole charge spin alone can occur the magnetic seems to be a seperate structuring action.
Martin

could you elaborate, please...you are not spamming...we are all here to learn...hence the discussion

images are always welcome

all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled.

[nueview]

ok i will try to explain what i am thinking it is kind of hard and may be what you are trying to explain as well.

Flip-Flop Double Joule Thief - YouTube

this is a circuit i built to try to show folks that something is wrong it ran for 38 days and i shut it down the circuit runs down during the day and charges at night or the other way around but the main point is the battery after about two days reads almost no current so what is the force that keeps it running it isn't current for sure.

i do not know how to post a drawing here but have two more circuits that kind of go with this they were made years ago and do work but they are not proper electronics as i was just learning back then and am not so sure that was a good thing.

i am pretty sure that all this has to do with the spin and how the charge and magnetic fields breath outside and then inverse on the inside of matter.
and this may account for the charge packet we term as the electron which really isn't at all.

if you could tell me how to post a picture it would help allot sorry i am not a computer nerd.
Martin