Perpetual Motion Holder
Dave Nelson's Commentary on Leedskalnin
Tips for the Rocket People
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Decoding Ed's Writings
A sound basis to Rotational Dynamics
The correlation between temperature and wavelength is disputed by sky scholar. . Instead we can derive useful data about the frequency of chemical reactions and the magnetic patterns that distinguish these dynamic states of materiality. . The expansive nature of these dynamics are typically described as radiation, but the full nature of the dynamic includes implosive or absorption behaviours, so expansion and contraction are always present in these high frequency patterns . Explosive and implosive behaviours are a matter of degree and we may characterise them as attractive and repulsive behaviours at different modes.
And what lies beyond these frequencies in material dynamics? NMR is our next step forward , but we need to dramatically simplify its description and mathematical calculus by releasing it from the electron myth
When theorising about planets start with magnetism and magnetic currents. Allow magnetic currents to be filamentary dynamics which may become vorticularly knotted and generate a plasmoid. The p,asmoid settles into a sun format spur good out planet forms both rocky and gaseous,
The fuzzy core of Jupiter is a plasmoid.
Magnetic currents in crystalline forms are dynamic. A bar magnet is dynamic not static
Magnetic behaviour in space differs from behaviour on earth thus a magnetic pole is a relative dynamic region definrd by it dynamic behaviour relative to another identified pole. .
Firstly polarities seem to be preferentially linked, the linking region appearing neutrally active to poles similar to the linked one. The poles distinguish themselves by a rotation translation behaviour. The rotation translation typically brings poles into alignment, so that we say like poles rotate away while unlike poles rotate toward each other . . Like poles tend to rptate by a torque until they are in a dynamic equilibrium position. With damped rotation. In such a position a like pole rotates into contact with an unlike pole by a rptorque .
Opposite polarities have a minimal rotational force in this position but a large attractive or combining force , modulated by how close the repulsing polarities are. .
Repulsing poles embedded in a medium rThat is magnetively inductive can be swamped by the larger ferromagnetic attraction. Thus a lone south pole domain surrounded by neutral to north pole domains will rotate away.froma south pole but the whole ensemble will be rotating toward the south polarity.
Thus when we consider gravity we should bear in mind that it is magnetic in origin, and we have been induced in a pae
rMagnetic msramagnetic manner. If we try to
Turn ourselves upside down we rotate back cown and fall. Our magnetic repulsion is too weak
In microgravity we can experience tne variation like the GOES satellites
Do the field equations of Einstein say space time exists?
Not at all!
Simply put mathmagicians have found a way of describing dynamic situations using a 4 dimensional array. . Such an array bends the mi d and imagination of algebraic geometers. . So they “trip out”. When they come back from their weird experience they try to make sense of it in normal everyday language. They try but they fail!
If, however you start with a rotationally dynamic aether material or immaterial and understand or interpret the rotation as magnetic inductive force behaviour, you can make sense of data without the mind trip . But one does need to avoid a static view of everything. Magnetic behaviour is rotationally dynamic. Thus materiality warps and wefts in time. Time however warps and wefts in relative motions, so use a metronome and see it happen so easily!
The ticking of a clock or the motion around the sun, or a pendulum swing usually occur regularly enough for us to assume it is a constant. But anyone who dances, composes music, practices on a musical instrument knows time varies perceptually by motion.
So putting this all together we understand the spiral or vorticular nature of our experiences. Einsteins equations are just a very difficult and nerdish way of saying all this!
Now we know Einsteins equations are incomplete. They compare curvature(not dynamic) to gravity, and by the way also so called electromagnetic c
Force) which is dynamic! Thus, as Nasiim Haramein pointed out the dynamic Torque term is misding .
And of course i point out that the rotational dynamic terms after torque are also missing!
So for Einsteinians they have given up a more straight forward observational theory for a mindblowing complicated one which essentially is inadequate.
As with any theory we can usually replace complexity ( which is not intrinsically wrong, just unmanageable) with something intuitively simpler.
My vote goes for rotational dynamics as defined by magnetic behaviours.
Magnetostatics and subsequently magnetohydrodynamics misleads the interpretation of dynamic data! So a lodestone magnetic crystal not only can have seemingly odd pole structures but also dynamic pole arrangements. The solenoid or bar magnet models obscure this dynamic. For example the H field within a solenoid is so compressed that spontaneous harmonic oscillations are squashed. However in the surrounding B field those oscillations show up as filamentary rotating structures. These structures show up really well with magnetic fluid rather than iron filings .
So the B field “lines”are lines of torque equilibrium of dipoles, not an indication of the magnetodynamic that occurs around them , perpendicular to them in an axis of rotation sense. These B field surfaces are thus trochoidal dynamic.
The pole -pole interaction is the only way to determine dipole orientation and given a standar bar magnet the pole geometry differs only dynamically. So one dynamic configuration is like a straight attractor beam the other is like a rotating pillow that rotates the pole actively around the reference pole , which we have misleadingly called repulsion rather than rotation .
It is sounder to assume all materiality is magnetodynamic and thus poles represent equilibrium boundary conditions for rotational centres. Depending on the viscosity of the material is how stable those poles appear dynamically.
So once again electrostatics misleads. The magnetodynamic variation between outer space and ground is greater the higher the sensors go.
The phi angle variation measured in the IMF ( a static concept)simply shows a Dynamic IMF, . Any inductor conductor will transfer this varying magnetic potential to ground and back again as a wildly alternating “ current”.
Because of the variation in conductivity/inductivity this potential and current is stored as “charge” in the various layers, clouds and pockets of material concentrations in the atmosphere and ground.. . Lightning is jusht one of the many ways these magnetic potentials flow in a magnetic current , usually as a Mased but multiply coherent discharge in all frequencies, we call this mode of magnetic behaviour Electric.
A stupid question here....
How do we even know, that this here, presented in Thunderbolts project video and all over the place is even true?
edited June 14
Who knows!😂. But if I found many of these thunder eggs I would be curious to understand how they formed.
Fractalforums.org shows you many mathematical structures and sculptures formed by iterative application of calculation rules. While this may seem meaningless and even confusing, I understand after years of study and meditation that these types of calculations in a computer model trochoidal rotational dynamics. . The application of a constraint on the symbols and the displaying of this by a colour cycle, allows the model to depict what we could see as we sculpt away layers. .
From a rotational dynamic fractal viewpoint these forms are not unusual.
Is the earth just a big thunder egg?
We can not rule it out , if we are open minded that is. The data can always be interpreted to support the prevailing view, but a “true” interpretation will account for everything in the data.
Having said that, no interpretation is “ the truth” in my opinion. It is all about utilitarian models..
So far I believe I have demonstrated that a magnetic universe with a magnetic current of a rotational dynamic behaviour is a superior foundation to our current particle models of materiality and indeed electric models.
It may be hard to see any practical use in adopting this standpoint because admittedly it often comes down to a difference in a ranges of frequencies amplitudes and phases,, but I like that way of apprehending my experiential continuum 😎
This is the state of the magnetic theory at the moment. It is based on electricity causing magnetism.
As you may gather they are having a hard time of it.
Essentially they are using vortices and calling them dynamos! These vortices generate magnetism. When I was a kid a dynamo generated electricity!
So let’s do that, shall we.
Assume the vortices are magnetism. Hey then we do not need to worry about viscosity, Reynolds numbers, , Elkins boundary layers etc etc. .
What about the velocity field? Replace that by frequency. Scale by anmplitude and interact by phase.
So what about heat transfer?
The phase interactions are fractal form generators, so the currents of these forms moving relative to a standing dynamic will be defined as a convection and/conduction band, and these will co duct both heat and the electric mode of magnetism.
So we can dramatically simplify our mathematical models and generate”electric” filaments instead that are of course different modes of magnetic behaviour .
Materiality requires viscosity, so adding viscosity, instead of being problematic for generating magnetism, naturally generates regional electric modes which we. May call electrically charged materiality. And of course chemistry will then be associated with these regional entities,
The hysteresis loop and magnetic decay will govern the stability and longevity of these elemental and compound structures.
As the story unfolds from the mythic patterns, the power of the magnetic current becomes gloriously displayed. Jupiter the great magnetic giant aligning Saturn Venus and mars in a vast paramagnetic structure which is unstable precisely because of rotational dynamics and the influence of our magnetic sun! The plasma streams or “dragons” are wonderful to behold, and terrifying to experience. The magnetic currents are the dragons of mythology.
Imagine as she says, three dimensional chladini resonance . Suddenly instead of waves we are now dealing with rotations.
It hard to understand sometimes, what I mean by rotational Dynamics. I do not mean sine or cosine Waves. However if we combine these sine and cosine disturbances in three-dimensions we will get a jerky rotational motion which is based on the motions of the sphere.
These motions are not actually Spheroidal, they are trochoidal. This is the space news in all types of rotational directions. These spaces the moon with actually be the nodes, and the forces moving them will be the anti-nodes. I
So for example Jupiter and it’s means form a resonant system. However the space around the giant planet and other moons his behaving, it is causing a giant node in the middle surrounded by smaller nodes circulating the giant node.
So this mathematical model of Rotational dynamics is often
Misleadingly portrayed. The sinewave is only the component in the plane of the rotational dynamic in the three-dimensional frame
I got an incorrect string error when I try to edit the above post .
Enjoy rotational dynamic fractal distribution of magnetic current power!
The waves here are sinusoids, but in general the deformations are trochoidal, not shown, and that is the nature of magnetic behaviour.
Clearly the electron is not a particle! As J J Thompson suggested it is a faraday tube of “ magnetic induction force at a given range of frequencies and amplitudes.
By calling rotation a particle the scientists here attached a velocity and “mass” to a wave front. This wave front is then considered only as a particle until experiments show they are not. The deformation in the environmental magnetic “field” is not considered, excluded by this particulate view. . Beams of particles are simply specific trochoidal wave fronts in the magnetic field. . Our measuring schemes determine what resolution we can use to make these particulate distinctions of the magnetic wavefronts in the magnetic medium through which these currents of ripples flow.
This is the proposed full nature of a magnetic current in free space as opposed to a wave guided form induced around certain density and viscosity characterised materials.