Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

A sound basis to Rotational Dynamics



  • The scalability of the magnetic double layer to a toroidal dynamic requires Eds PMH model to understand using Ed’s lndividual pole dynamic to explain the dynamic of an electric or rather magnetic current sometimes leads to misleading images of bar magnets instead of dynamic surfaces of varying magnetic potential. .
    Faradays field lines or rather tubes obscure the filamentary structure of these surfaces, and the spatial distribution of these filaments. . Faradays tubes only represent the direction of volumetric density of magnetic induction , the force motion vector is always like hydrostatic pressure from or rather between low and high density.
  • edited January 26

    When they look for magnetic re-connection or four on angles of the magnetic field using Farrelly field lines they confuse the issue. Field lines in the cells are indications only of the density of the magnetic flux, and the direction in which that density increases or decreases. At magnetic flux has a density distribution is one of the factors that Faraday export. And the consequence of it exclamation as to equate the magnetic density flux two of the density of the fluid. Which case the movement of objects within such a magnetic into the field depends on hydrostatic pressures and not on B
    Field lines or tubes or surfaces.
    When we come to look at the interaction of volume densities are used to rule that like density is aggregate and opposites in density disaggregate, That is like densities increase and therefore impel and opposite density is decrease in there for discount . Mechanically like density is increase the relevant pressure whereas opposite densities decrease the pressure and so like identities have a forcing affect which expands the space between the polls, well opposite densities have an implosion effect that reduces the forces between the poles

  • Long term readers will not be surprised at this gradual realisation on the part of the mainstream. However it may surprise you that fluid dynamics is the best model of magnetic behaviour and thus of the electric mode consequentially.
    Into fluid dynamics I of course advocate the use of trochoidal functions as descriptors which allow us to use Fourier forms to describe states of dynamic equilibrium or with small perturbations.
    Simply put: the waters below the boundary are separated from the waters above the boundary and we call the heavens! This boundary is a dynamically changing one showing the effect of the dynamic magnetic behaviour Yehovah has established the Earth in
  • Jehovajah said:

    Simply put: the waters below the boundary are separated from the waters above the boundary and we call the heavens!

    That's right.

  • Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.
    Nikola Tesla, Modern Mechanics and Inventions, July, 1934
  • My contributions will be a little sparser now, because I am officially blind!

    However I am endeavouring to make contact with the library of Congress to see if I can get some kind of research access to Howard Johnson‘s book discovering magnetism. If and when I am successful , I will do my best to finish of the thread which deals with Howard Johnson Steve Davies and these are the collaborator ♥️
  • @Jehovajah What do you mean by “officially blind” please? :-O

    I mean i’m suffering eye pain since last three weeks or so, but... Blind?

  • The field theory is a fluid theory we see it plainly stated here . It sounds impressive but it is wrong and leads to darkness and inflation
  • That’s right, but quantum FT is different to classical FT.
    QFT is just a load of crap mixed with einsteinian mumbo jumbo and non-existent particles in non-existent time and space.
    Appart from that, nobody can QUANTify a field, so the whole QFT is ridiculous right there.
  • I agree, with a qualification. The general mathematical description which replaces faradays lines and tubes of magnetic force, is of maxwells creation. Faraday and Maxwell parted company with Maxwell miss understood faradays concept of a force! Faradays concept of a force was in healingly and quantifiable, and able to manifest itself in any required form to explain the observed phenomena and for phenomena.

    Essentially what this thread is all about is trying to correct a universal mistake made by mathematical physicists which is, that forces are merely straight line vectors. This thread introduces the notion of a curvilinear vector.

    It is unfortunate that Faraday is not alive to comment upon this notion of a curvilinear vector to give his opinion as to whether this is a mathematical equivalent of his notion of force.

    Any quantifiable measure of these unquantifiable notions must be consistent in the relationship to the unquantifiable notion. I submit in this thread that the rotational dynamic, is the simplest description of the type of force that faraday in visaged which is accessible to a Newtonian quantification.

    It may prove to be to simple mathematical description but it is difficult to conceive anything that is more complex without losing accessivilify.

    Certainly using complex or quaternion mathematics introduces a mysterious element into the process of calculation. However The Grassman treatment of vectors or rather line segment removes this mysterious characteristic and offers a more prosaic understanding of the calculations involved .

    The introduction of probability, statistical methods into the description remains a valid mathematical tool, but only in the context of dealing with the vast dataset Generated by modern experimental processes.
    The attempt to explain the mathematical in terms of material properties is a false step . Physicist and mathematician are always approximating and abstracting from existing material behaviours and properties. In this night the invisible “fields “ represent quantifiable behaviours within a real material context. It is evident that a fluid context, even a liquid context is the best background to start from

  • edited April 12

    Black hole or whole lack? In a magnetic universe we see such rotational dynamics as evidence of polarity which I’m other words means vorticular motion about a Boscovich Force centre as opposed to a Maxwellian description. Grassmann Ian algebras apply!

    Get the difference ?
  • edited April 17

    They change darkness into light! They change the magnetic power of Yehovah into the light of their theories and they must take this magnetic power and collet gravity.
    The rotational dynamics described here are used to pull the wool over your eyes.
    Magnetohydrodynamics should be renamed as the dynamics of the magnetic hydrogen and the magnetic oxygen . Both of these will be in a state which is called gashes or plasma

    Of course there is no cause of magnetism beyond Jehovah. However the cause of electricity is the rotational dynamic of magnetic behaviour.
  • The magnificent magnetic power of Yehovah

    Mount Sinai was shrouded in smoke, and the smoke was like the smoke of a furnace! And the Mountain exuded greatly because it had become volcanic!

    Moses station the people near to an active volcano called Mount Sinai. It was not as active as Mount Etna but still very dangerous. That is why Yehovah said do not let anyone man or animal come near to the mountains, or rather volcano!
    When Yehovah came down in the clouds he came down onto an active volcano. And when he called Moses up to this active volcano, Moses became the first volcanologist, but he would not have gone up if Yehovah was not protecting him!
    Yet when he came before Yehovah Yehovah was concerned for the safety of the people, because he knew the dangers of a volcano!

    Yehovah can change rock into lava, and a mountain into a volcano!
  • edited 6:18AM

    Magnetodynamics! The universe is organised magneto dynamically which in abstract simplicity means rotational fluid dynamics or the magneto dynamics of oxygen and of hydrogen, Magneto hydrodynamics or as some call it magneto plasma dynamics.

    Magnetodynamics is also not considered! And Weber was foremost a magnetic theorist. The theoretical structure is now a oscillating field which manifests as quarks from which electrons protons and neutrons and neutrinos are theoretically contrived! It is simply theoretically easier to set magnetic behaviour as a fundamental rotational primitive and to derive charge, motion and force and spatial extension and intension from it. While this in fact seems to have little utilitarian advantage it has the supreme advantage of making sense!

  • Incommensurability, not been able to measure something exactly, is a geometrical and standards concept. We cannot measure anything without the following process: we set a standard. We use that standard . When something does not fit into that standard exactly all that standard does not fit into something exactly that thing is incommensurable. Field incommensurability is trying to explain when one field does not fit exactly into another field or when one field is not coherent with another field. If you think of gears then if one gear tooth fixed exactly into another geared to this week is it a gears are commensurable however if a gay tooth does not fit into another day to then the gears are incommensurable, and will not transmit power effectively in a geartrain.
Sign In or Register to comment.