The Way Electricity Runs In A Wire

2456725

Comments

  • edited January 2014
    I was drawn to Ed by RWG research raving about the PMH, plus my own research and meditation into my experience of my reality.

    I was impressed by Ed's matter of fact style. I got distracted a bit by the hero worship, but I soon sorted that out!

    I do not think Ed is some Einstein. What Ed is is Einstein's common sense critic! In fact he is Maxwell, Faraday and other illustrious names critic! Ed clearly went back and read Gilbert's work on Magnetim, or a summary of it. Most text books are always years even centuries out of date anyway.

    Ed repeats most of Gilbert's essential experiments but updates it with the "electric current " around a copper wire. From this philosophical standpoint it is easy to explain phenomena in terms of Gilbert's magnet corpuscles or monopoles.

    I avoid the polar terminology because it is confusing, so I use plasma instead. Gilbert posits 2 plasmas and these circulate in opposition to one another..

    I think it is misleading to use a bar magnet as a model of these magnetic plasmas. Both Ed and Gilbert base magnetism on the earths field. A lodestone is a better model of magnetism. For a long time the Royal society had a multipolar Lodestone in its vaults as the magnetic standard..

    Recent research by Ivor Catt demonstrates the untenability of Magnetostatics and electrostatics! In other words your 0 is a dynamic equilibrium, not a static one!

    Dynamic equilibria are relativistic in nature, and depend on scale, therefore.

    Outside of the dynamic centre the plasmas move rotationally relative to that centre. The plasmas move in opposing rotations which are best visualised as intertwining helices. The scale for this is : fractal or scale free. This means at all scales one should find this behavioural phenomenon. Of course as we drop down or expand in scale the dynamic centres shift accordingly. By that I mean, for example , as we drop down in scale a single magnetic system breaks up into many magnetic subsystems of the same kind. Concentrating on one of the subsystem allows us to drop down to the next scale!

    These magnetic subsystems should be thought of in terms of lodestone crystals not bar magnets!
  • edited January 2014
    Bar magnets are junk, VEE magnets are the key, square Vee magnets, build a magneto from V magnets and the current will be balanced the center between north and south, within a V-magnet is 0, electromagnets and bar magnets, and the U-shaped magnet all are a figure 8 at there center, only the V-shaped permanent magnet is 0 at center. The pinch is 0. The V-magnet compresses north and south into the poled ends leaving the center clear and 0.[look at water compression] When current is drawn from the flux of a permanent magnet, in the V-shape, and when placed in the right way in a magneto, current in the same amount that is being used, is collected from the air, in the form of magnetic static, see Leeskalnin's experiment showing how magnets collect on mass. Know matter how much static looks electric it is magnetic, the shock it gives is neither hear nor there, you know as well as I static is magnetic. Take a trampoline for ex. my kids jump on it little bits of sticks of leaves , and dust and some times rocks, get tracked on the trampline's pad , when I go to clean it off, there is static that shocks me however everything from the dust to the sticks and even the rocks are magnetized. Static is magnetic, not has magnetic properties just is. The Earth is magnet we live within the flux. The earth is within the suns flux . the sun is within flux and so on. Magnets within magnets within magnets or PMH's within PMH's.
  • It has been said there is only one difference between a electromagnet and a permanent magnet that is one must be powered. On the topic of scales I mean from big to little. If you look at a PMH with an open mind you see a model of a permanent magnet, but nearly looks like a electromagnet. On scale the PMH is a model of the multiverse it is all so a permanent magnet and a type of electromagnet, only a charged pmh stays in the form of a electromagnet, until the power is let go. The PMH is a electromagnet holder, but meant for magnetic current or magnetricity, not electricity.
  • @Jehovajah

    Among the competing understandings of what unites the various currents designated by "Esotericism" in the scholarly sense, perhaps the most influential has been proposed by Antoine Faivre. His definition is based on the presence in the esoteric currents of four essential characteristics: a theory of correspondences between all parts of the invisible and the visible cosmos, the conviction that nature is a living entity owing to a divine presence or life-force, the need for mediating elements (such as symbols, rituals, angels, visions) in order to access spiritual knowledge, and, fourthly, an experience of personal and spiritual transmutation when arriving at this knowledge. To this are added two non-intrinsic characteristics. Esotericists frequently suggest that there is a concordance between different religious traditions: best example is the belief in prisca theologia (ancient theology) or in philosophia perennis (perennial philosophy). Finally, esotericism sometimes suggests the idea of a secret transmission of spiritual teachings, through initiation from master to disciple.[9] It should, however, be emphasized that Faivre's definition is one of several divergent understandings of the most appropriate use of the term.
  • edited January 2014
    The shape or Geometry of the plasma rotations is significant to what we observe. A lodestone is a crystalline structure which holds these rotating pasmas in a more generalised way, and in fact roughly models the earth magnetic structures.

    When I read Ed's instructions on the experiments I am tickled by his directness but impressed by his solid experimental method. He uses the earths magnetic system to magnetise conductors using heat generated by a copper conductor/ resistor.

    In the thread about Pierre Luigi I have placed many philosophical papers as a resource. One shows how to create very powerful magnets by alignment even as powerful as the lodestone reference of the time. The difference the copper conductor makes is by supplying the plasmas for the process more directly than by drawing them in from the earths magnetic field.

    Then Ed goes on to discuss the PMH. It can be or do 4 things he states. Of these 4 things typically 2 the electromagnet and the transformer are the ones commonly known .mthe third as a generator/ motor is known but under different heading: usually Faradays disc motor or generator, which was a complete subversion of Arago's disc!

    These are not new concepts but established engineering constructions. The difference was that Ed, like his predecessors before Faraday, explained these in terms of magnetic currents! Because they had a consistent theoretical and philosophical understanding they routinely stored magnetic currents in permanent magnets! This is still done today by placing keepers over the alternating poles of bar magnets or horseshoe magnets.

    All Ed did was update the techniques to include so called electricity! These aspects were simply obscured by the prevailing electron theory. Electromagnets are not switched on and off as soe naively suggest. The hysteresis curve demonstrates that a conductor of magneticity becomes saturated with magnetic plasmas. In that case it retains its magnetic behaviours. To switch it off a small reversing current has to be applied. The PMH is a simple demonstration of magnetic current in a magnetic conductor which has not been saturated with magnetic or Gilbert plasmas.

    Another key observation is the natural oscillation of a current around a wire passing through a field magnet. We are universally taught that Fleming's rule determines the current direction around a wire. Ed simply shows that is not the case! Wires that pass through an establish magnetic current develop an oscillating magnetic current themselves! In other words Lenz's Law applies to wires as well as copper discs, and this is why Faraday failed to detect anything substantial in his voltaic cell experiments.

    Now Ivor Catt has experimental oscilloscope evidence of this dual magnetic current. He can show that an induced voltage spike spreads out ino 2 opposite voltage spikes . The inducing voltage In the active line also spreads into 2 voltages. These are technically retractions of the current through different media.

    Using a galvanometer it would be impossible to detect these magnetic phase differences. But as Ed points out, the flash of light consists of 2 flashes so close together as to go undetected.
    .
    I have to ask myself, where do we go wrong! These observations are empirical testable and deducuble . When did we lose this common sense approach? The answer I am afraid is hn we let mathematicians and greed loose on these fundamental apprehensions.
  • edited January 2014
    Electricity does not run in a wire.
    I can accept that Ed did not mean electricity he meant magneticity. But that does not run in a wire either. Ed said the plasmas engage in a helical spin dance past each other with plasmas spinning out of and into the wire.

    This is a tribomagnetic effect, which means ' frictional/viscous contact of the plasmas are observed as magnetic behaviour




    This video shows the tribomagnetic effect involved in a collision. Notice the plasmas eject and interact, but these are split by our terminology into 3 different points of view! The electromagnetic view is usually excluded, leaving the Thermo mechanical view. But the authors claim an electrochemical view!

    The simples Gilbert's /Ed's plasma view is thought to simple to explain what is going on. For a modern chemist, physicist, engineer that may be technically true, but for the lay person or the philosopher it is sufficient and general. It is less complex than the electron etc model and more intuitive.
    The spiralling helices have a gyre. If the gyres face each other they spiral through each other. If they face away from each other then they are pulled away from each other. If they point parallel/ antiparallel to each other they self organise into a crystalline pattern.
  • @Jehovajah

    Among the competing understandings of what unites the various currents designated by "Esotericism" in the scholarly sense, perhaps the most influential has been proposed by Antoine Faivre. His definition is based on the presence in the esoteric currents of four essential characteristics: a theory of correspondences between all parts of the invisible and the visible cosmos, the conviction that nature is a living entity owing to a divine presence or life-force, the need for mediating elements (such as symbols, rituals, angels, visions) in order to access spiritual knowledge, and, fourthly, an experience of personal and spiritual transmutation when arriving at this knowledge. To this are added two non-intrinsic characteristics. Esotericists frequently suggest that there is a concordance between different religious traditions: best example is the belief in prisca theologia (ancient theology) or in philosophia perennis (perennial philosophy). Finally, esotericism sometimes suggests the idea of a secret transmission of spiritual teachings, through initiation from master to disciple.[9] It should, however, be emphasized that Faivre's definition is one of several divergent understandings of the most appropriate use of the term.
  • When looking at the Yin and Yang symbol , most people only see the 2 halves . However their are 3 parts, even 4 parts if you really break it down. You see the Yin and Yang, but the one thing always over looked is the line between . The line between is a very important part, it holds Yin from Yang part yet together. The line is the place of balance, or zero. If I were a fish I mite not realize the mass of the water around me, like man does not realize the mass of the air around him, this is the 4 th part. The Yin and Yang is a very important symbol , it clearly shows, many things simply about the power of life and how it moves. Most importantly it shows us how this power moves on a wire. Zero being equal or balance, The Yin and Yang also shows motion, if A single wire were pasted through the center of the Yin and Yang, it clearly shows north and south spinning around the outside of the wire, but you must realize 0 is within the wire moving with north and south. 0 holds the magnets to the wire and away. The simple push and pull is the motion, Water spouts, and tornadoes, would collapse without 0. When surfing the tubes you surf within would not be there without 0. Zero is motion.
  • edited January 2014




    Arago's disc and tribomagnetism takes many forms, but the principle is the same. Rotate a conductor in the earths magnetic field and see the rotating magneticity couple with other magnetic bubbles.

    Faraday's electric current explanation completely obscures the total magnetic behavioural phenomena, and it's implicit link to friction and rotation!
    The gyre of these magnetic bubbles is the same. In space there is only one gyre( 3 kinds) but many relativistic views of it. Thus the plasmas appear to have opposing gyres but in fact they have the same. The direction in which a gyre is viewed explains the relativistic north south descriptives.


    Without reference to poles we observe attraction and repulsion only. That is a lodestone orients itself, apparently so as to attract. If it is not allowed to reorient then the lodestones have to be pushed together to experience repulsion!

    The rules about poles attracting are entirely misleading. The gyres either admit a closer connection by rotation or they do not. Attempting to force 2 gyres together if they are not anti parallel will result in repulsion. Parallel gyres will always repulse.

    Do anti parallel gyres attract?

    The case is more that the environment around anti parallel gyres pushes them together into closer equilibrium.

    Another way to look at it is that the gyres gear anti parallel gyres into closer affinity.

    There are perhaps 3 types of gyre: the condensing or inward spiralling one; the fixed radial gyre and finally the expanding or evaporating radial gyre.

    In our understanding of magnetism we ignored gyre and went with electricity!
  • edited January 2014
    You do realize we are talking about the same thing? Yes 3 types of magnetic [only] flux. Electricity has to be made, from magnets, but magnets are every were in nature. Lodestone have the right minerals, similar to iron, having holding force . The matter that makes up it's mass once lived, far more compressed than coral or limestone. every thing on earth is alive or once lived. Dead wood [fallin branch] can be burnt you see its power being let lose out in to the air as heat and light. The same goes for stone only it will not burn as easy, power is trapped. When I die the power of my life will be gone yet my flesh will still burn. Magnets left behind. Static is magnetic. Life is static, magnetic, 0- is the key to balance, or gyre. ED said a magnet is not a magnet because of what it is made of but rather what is flowing within it. Most only think of magnets, when looking at a permanet magnet. Never thinking about the millions of magnets that are trapped, within the mass of the material , It's all flux weather it's the air we breath or the darkness of space
  • the above video just for fun
  • edited January 2014
    There are many instructional data filled videos on YouTube that enable us to see what our intuition or deductions only guess at.

    My point is that these empirical evidence records do not confirm existing theory, they provide us with new data to establish new theorie or insights



    The description of matter as particles or fragments or corpuscles is well attested to. But what we can now observe is the local dynamics of a corpuscle, or particle. They have behaviours which I simply explain as local rotations. That means to describe the rotation we have to set up a reference frame in the corpuscle and measure the rotations with that reference frame.

    While this is a metrical approach, it confirms the fractal nature of fluid rotation. Even if a fluid looks as if it is rotating as one rigid body, in fact we can expect rotation within that rotation at any point we choose.

    What that means is that when the sea rolls in onto the beach it does do because that interaction dampens all other rotations leaving the cylindrical rotation onto the beach.

    Similarly, when a conducting wire interacts with spacematter or the aether or the Gilbert/ Leedskalnin plasmas the wire dampens all other rotations leaving the rotation around the wire and between the wire.. This energy of rotation is of many frequencies some of which are sufficient to enter ino the lamp and energise lamp light. That this energy is defined as magnetic is not important to me. What is important is that it is all around us and it operates in consistent ways in all materials.

    Electricity does not run in a wire it falls upon it from outside and backwashes off it into the surrounding SpaceMatter or cosmic force. When it has the correct frequency it can create sparks and light lamps
  • edited January 2014
    Here is a video demonstrating the generation of a magnetic or plasma vortex bubble, as expected by the confining of rotating vortices into a spiral "wave" guide.

    The electro Thermo magneto complex is evident, but it takes a while to generate the frequency of rotation for visible " light" : Thermo luminescence!
  • edited January 2014
    The above video is also understood by me to be a clear example of cold fusion and sonoluminescence.

    The theoretical position on these concepts is shifting daily, and mostly in secret because guess who wants to be in a position of commercial advantage?

    In any case this article I posted on Arago's disc is more evidence of the mechanical rotation of SpaceMatter being the source of the magneto Thermo electro complex behaviour we currently call Electromagnetism.

    Consider this in relation to Arago's disk
    The similarity between sheared rotation and so called electric rotation is weakly visible.





    One could say that rotating the disc created weak electromotive rotation.

    However Arago's rotation is associated with magnetic coupling. The magneto motive force is currently explained as electromotive force generating magneto motive force. This introduction of electromotive force is a dream of Faradays. It is possible to explain all phenomena in terms of magneto motive force.

    Arago's disk stands counter to the electric current interpretation based on the voltaic cell, which was agreed by committee to be generated by a chemical galvanic process!
    Volts thought differently. He theorised it was due to the " atmosphere" around metals, again a magnetic atmosphere is entirely feasible!

    For me the mechanical case for electromagnetic and Thermo antimagnetic behaviours is strong. Different frequencies and planes of rotation can account for distinct " electric " and "magnetic" behaviours especially in conjunction with radial variation.
Sign In or Register to comment.