How A Candle Really Works

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, for sometime, I have pondered how a flame works and what it actually is.
I have some ideas and I have seen people doing high voltage experiments where the plasma looks just like a candle flame.
Then I remember bedini talk about food and do we think all of the work a human can do comes from the food, as in comparing it to burning it by a flame, it is nowhere near the same as the work that a human body can do with that food.
So I think this has similarities.
What I am pondering is and I know the explanation is, that wax vapor is the source of fuel for a candle flame and also that the wax keeps the wick cool, so it lasts.

Though what I am thinking is, is that the actual fuel source is the air it is immersed within and it is obvious that they left that out of their explanations for whatever reason.
Place the candle in a jar and make a vacuum inside the jar and you now have no flame, so then it seems that the wax vapor is not the fuel source. The gases in the air is the fuel source.
Also, I think that the candle wax is the heat sink for the candle wick as they do claim, though I think that the candle could burn practically forever, if we were to use a heat sink material for the wick that did not break down as the wax does.
A candle is somewhat like a battery, a batteries parts facilitate and create the spark (dipole, voltage) whereas, a candle only facilitates the dipole, but does not contain it's own intrinsic spark maker or dipole to initiate the higher frequency flame.
Which is why we have to use a spark or match to light the candle wick.
Though once burning, it would burn forever as long as we keep the wick from breaking down, like what bearden speaks about, not killing the dipole.
A candle flame is nothing more than an electromagnetic dipole, though I think we have been conditioned to think that the flame is somehow powered by wax or a log on a fire.
We should ask ourselves, why would anyone leave out the fact that a candle flame would extinguish itself without the air surrounding it.

And so my idea is, how do we cool a candle wick, so it can continue to use the air around it as the fuel, which was always the case.
And by this cooling, the wick will not go into a random molecular vibration or breakdown and we can have a candle last a long time.
Your comments are welcome, I'd like to hear your thoughts on my line of thinking.
peace love light
tyson

[Shadesz]

C-chian in wax + O2 in air + heat = CO2 + more heat

[SkyWatcher]

Hi shades, thanks for reply.
In your opinion, is the candle flames main energy source, from the wax vapor or the air it sits in?
If it is the air the candle wick sits in, then the wax is only to prolong the life of the wick. What you think.
peace love light
tyson

[Shadesz]

The wax.

If it were the air, you would be using CO2 and O2, to create CO2... but that equation wouldn't balance (thinking back to highscool chemistry classes). Hence it can't be from the air.

Because it is form the wax you are getting a long carbon chain from the wax, combing all those carbons with oxygen from the air (O2) and creating CO2.

[quantumuppercut]

The basic to fire is fuel, heat, and oxygen. You take out any one in the equation and the flame goes out. If you want to see oxygen as fuel, it wouldn't really matter. I think we see wax as fuel because it is less abundant. Suppose we see wax everywhere we go and we rarely see oxygen, then oxygen would more likely be "fuel" lol.

I think what you thinking is how we can have a forever flame. There is a question by scientists when they made the atom bomb was "what if the chain reaction causing more chain reaction?"

Once in a class, we were learning Uranium fission. The teacher told us that the input energy is neutrons ~ 2MeV(rusty memory now). I asked how can we gain energy if we have input? She saids "because we get more output than input". lol I sometimes ask myself how can order born from chaos evidently in the universe. Nature must be hiding something from us.

[SkyWatcher]

hi folks, thanks for replies.
@shades, I respect your opinion, though I don't know what all that means and to be honest, I think a lot of textbook stuff is only to hide something, guess it's up to us to figure out what they are trying to hide.

@quantum, thanks for your thoughts, so what do you think, do you think a forever candle is possible.

What I am trying to do, is think outside the box they have tried to put our consciousness in.
So with all the equations aside, please try and offer your own thoughts, disregard all textbooks and all school, media or any other type teachings one may have been exposed to and think about it for yourself.
You don't have to, it is your choice, just a suggestion.
So the reason i mention this interface between candle wick and flame and how it may be comparable to a battery is to try and comprehend the true nature of that interaction, not what seems obvious.
After all, it does not seem obvious that a candle flame is nothing more than a spark at a different frequency of vibration.
A candle flame, if raised in vibrational frequency high enough, would become a magnetic field just like an electromagnet produces.
So then, it seems that the interface at the wick and flame needs more investigation.
The wick itself is the facilitator that maintains the vibration of the spark or flame, just as a battery is the facilitator of the spark or voltage.
Though it is known, that with the battery, if we use a conductor below its relaxation time, we can prevent reflecting back upon our battery spark or dipole.
So how does this apply to a wick and flame, by not allowing the wick to see the flame and its energetic vibration, which causes heat in the wick and breakdown of its molecular structure, turning to ash.
These two examples are the same, though does not seem obvious.

The only question is, how do we prevent the flame from reflecting back upon the wick, just as a degenerate semiconductor behaves in not reflecting back upon a battery dipole.
Your opinions please, thanks.
peace love light
tyson

[Michelinho]

Hi all,

Take an oil lamp with an asbestos wick. The level of the oil decreases so oil is part of the burning process.
You have to tune the air intake to get a nice flame without the black smoke so air is part of the burning process, mixture of both limits smoke.

In a candle, the length and size of the wick act as mixture regulator. The wick is cooled by a flow of wax from and to it aiding efficiency.

Take care all,

Michel

[SkyWatcher]

Hi michel, thanks for the reply.
I have this intuition that the lamp oil is only to prolong the use of the wick, acting as a degenerate semiconductor would in not depleting the dipole facilitator.
What I'm saying may sound incorrect to some, though i feel it is the truth.
Just like oil in an engine is not the power source, it is just something to keep the process going longer, to prevent engine locking up.
I'm not saying making a forever candle flame is simple, I am saying i feel it is possible, if we can comprehend what is truly happening at the wick flame interface.
peace love light
tyson

[kcarring]

Interesting thought

I've often wondered about energy, food in, work out... and one factor that needs to be considered is storage. Think about how long a human can actually go without food. A long time actually, 21 days is not unreasonable. But, how long can you go with air? Or water?

Then we look at fuel. What is fuel? Is it not a storage medium, sure it is... So if massive amounts of plant matter decay, and become oil, and that is refined into fuel...

The real question is: how much water and air did those plants consume over their lifespan to grow into the mass that they were, before they died and rotted?

Energy is a long chain.

To think of the human body as a free energy device is almost silly. We are the product of a vast and enormous input array that precedes our birth even.

And yet when you break it down, what really is there? Mostly carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. Things that are hard to separate, and take little energy to combine.



Cool thoughts.
RIP Stan MEyer!

[Aaron]

Andreyev

If you want to see oxygen as fuel, it wouldn't really matter. I think we see wax as fuel because it is less abundant. Suppose we see wax everywhere we go and we rarely see oxygen, then oxygen would more likely be "fuel" lol.

Search Andreyev - very interesting

[Aaron]

overunity humans

To think of the human body as a free energy device is almost silly. We are the product of a vast and enormous input array that precedes our birth even.

The energy we produce as a living being is way more than can be accounted for in the calories we ingest or "burn" from our reserves. We are overunity machines. overunity humans

[boguslaw]

The energy we produce as a living being is way more than can be accounted for in the calories we ingest or "burn" from our reserves. We are overunity machines. overunity humans

Yes,and there is very interesting analogy because food we eat is used to recreate the used parts of the "sink" for cosmic energy ,which is our body.

[quantumuppercut]

hi folks, thanks for replies.
@shades, I respect your opinion, though I don't know what all that means and to be honest, I think a lot of textbook stuff is only to hide something, guess it's up to us to figure out what they are trying to hide.

@quantum, thanks for your thoughts, so what do you think, do you think a forever candle is possible.

What I am trying to do, is think outside the box they have tried to put our consciousness in.
So with all the equations aside, please try and offer your own thoughts, disregard all textbooks and all school, media or any other type teachings one may have been exposed to and think about it for yourself.
You don't have to, it is your choice, just a suggestion.
So the reason i mention this interface between candle wick and flame and how it may be comparable to a battery is to try and comprehend the true nature of that interaction, not what seems obvious.
After all, it does not seem obvious that a candle flame is nothing more than a spark at a different frequency of vibration.
A candle flame, if raised in vibrational frequency high enough, would become a magnetic field just like an electromagnet produces.
So then, it seems that the interface at the wick and flame needs more investigation.
The wick itself is the facilitator that maintains the vibration of the spark or flame, just as a battery is the facilitator of the spark or voltage.
Though it is known, that with the battery, if we use a conductor below its relaxation time, we can prevent reflecting back upon our battery spark or dipole.
So how does this apply to a wick and flame, by not allowing the wick to see the flame and its energetic vibration, which causes heat in the wick and breakdown of its molecular structure, turning to ash.
These two examples are the same, though does not seem obvious.

The only question is, how do we prevent the flame from reflecting back upon the wick, just as a degenerate semiconductor behaves in not reflecting back upon a battery dipole.
Your opinions please, thanks.
peace love light
tyson

hi Sky,

Sure, I do think a forever candle is possible, but there would be extra parts or conditions to a regular candle. I often think " It's not important weather something is possible or not, what important is should we make it possible or not". In my understanding, consciousness is something we collectively agreed upon weather one is aware of it or not. If you have an idea that sounds good to everyone, it will eventually get accepted collectively and harvest. This is why science is powerful. This is why I wish not to dismantle science but rather shows the true intention of the wise men who created science.

[rogerd]

Interesting

Interesting point of view there. Completely different from what we learnt in the text books. It's nice to have such varied explanations as it challenges established thought and convention and helps in the discovery of new stuff. I doubt anybody has given much thought to the candle after the first satisfactory explanation was given out. The dangers of modern education is that every one is taught the same principles and since no child is out of school every body learns the same things. There is very little chance for contrary thought or explanations.

[elias]

Interesting point skywatcher.

Agreed really that our bodies are overunity machines. the flame has a cone type structure. almost like the pineal gland.
Can we replicate the overunity mechanism of our bodies? You know our breathing and our heartbeat. How do these two enable us tap into the energy of the universe? And also where does the energy come from? Does it come from the center of our heart? or does it come from the center of Earth? Or the center of our Galaxy? Or the center of the universe?

Now what is energy? Energy can be said is present in everything that "moves". So I think that movement and energy are synonyms actually. Now the universe moves, so we say there is energy that makes it move. Now what is movement? It is change isn't it? when something changes we see some movement in the process. Now what is change? change is what sustains existence because there cannot be anything that is completely still, it needs to move to be.

So I have wondered what is the relation of breathing and heartbeat. For if we discover this and be able to model the process in electrical terms we can replicate the human body.

So if the energy of the universe comes from the Heart, (the flame of the heart) then what can we name it? Compassion? Humility? Appreciation? These are the virtues of the heart that illuminate the multiverses.

Can a Rodin coil and a Bashar coil be used to replicate the breathing and heartbeat of human body? Just visualize your heart inside a Bashar coil, and by breathing the bashar coil keeps the heart activated and by creating a vortex the Rodin coil captures the energy within that? i don't know, but it really does feel good when I imagine my heart sitting inside a Bashar coil.

Elias