Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Powered by leedskalnin.com & buzzdev.net
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Sorry for spam. Taco stopped that already.
I believe it was just some misunderstanding.
I have often wondered if the wire used to demonstrate the rotational/ circular force of magnetism a la Örsted ans Ampère was due to the twisting used to draw out a wire like copper!
I am sure it contributes, but essentially I think rotation is the fundamental motion of " space"
What does this mean?
For me rotation is otherwise described as magnetism . Thus all material and space is fundamentally and profoundly magnetic. Like Gilbert hypothesised little magnetic domains in motion sufficienyly explain magnetism if you accept 2 types of domain or monopoles.
I like to refer to these 2 types as fluid material or plasmas.
Material philosophy has adopted a wave corpuscle model. . It is presented as a mystery more due to the traditions of the Mystery Schools, than in the pragmatic sensibility. Pragmatically we know a fluid can look like a wave yet that wave feels like particles.as its cycle and reflective undulation vibrates against the fingers
Materials are different magnetic patterns , and part of those patterns have been assigned the name electric!"
The iron magnet and the electromagnet simply package these same undulating patterns indifferent form factors.
If you think that this guy is a nut, check it again: COSMOS WITHOUT GRAVITATION
I enjoyed reading Valikovsky's theory. It seems straight forward and intuitive. Further it seems it would be relatively easy to build an experiment that tests the validity of his claim if I understood it correctly. There should be a way to charge any object, relative to the earth, such that it floats. But I sense it is not so simple.
To understand fully why it is not so simple you need to delve into the Velikovsky's unpublished manuscript Before the Day Breaks where he describes his efforts to cure, so to speak, Einstein from his nonsensical theory of gravitation without ever mentioning or touching the subject of relativity. Remember Velikovsky was a trained psychiatrist of the highest order.
Here is an interesting quote from that manuscript: As you can see from this quote, Einstein had very limited and very simplistic understanding of electricity. Tesla was way way ahead of everybody else in this area back than, and I suspect that he still is.
Ken has produced his most accessible description yet
While fields are a but of theoretical gobbledygook for me nevertheless the spatial influence is kinetically measurable, and of course mechanically differentiable .
Coherence , as in MASING is an alternative modelling structure ..
But we never think that there may be more essential things, Somethings than air. No we are told that there is Nothing!
But then someone claims that an immaterial thing called spirit is the substrate of all things. There is no gradation from air to spirit. The two do not mix or have contact so some opine.
Thus magnetic behaviours become mysterious .
Some by logic establish a finer and finer grade of material things , material Somethings, others a coarser and coarser spiritual thing in order to explain magnetism.
Some place electrodynamics as causative of Magnetostatics but some refute the distinctions.
I am happy to set magnetic behaviour as the sound basis from which to construct all our models of these aetheric behaviours, because we live in a sea of magnetic fluid that flows around us continually .
Like a fish in the sea I am surrounded by fluids of differing densities and some densities are exponentially different to others . So different we call them discrete forms. But their difference is only in density, that is scale at which certain properties become differentiable
A fractal description of this fluid model requires only that exponential jumps be made between the scales at which behaviours are described.
The Fourier expansion of the binomial theorem is as good a model as any for mathematical categorisation of the different behaviours and the different geometrical( spaciometric) forms used as forc or vector models.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x179.htm
Classical theory combines electric and magnetic behaviours as modelling components. The ratio is 1:1.
We do not need the two concepts. We can combine them into a single magnetic theory
We do not need a particulate or corpuscular style of model we could use a fluid dynamic style of Model( original motivation for Maxwells concepts) .
This fluid model will support compression wave theory, a theory still in its infancy , and this wave compression( and expansion) can model impinging forces of both repulsion and attraction. The model requires the fluid to be elastic in the common sense.
The model thus assumes space to be an elastic fluid. Elastic fluids are notoriously difficult to model!
Claes Johnson has developed a numerical model of fluid dynamics that describes aerofoil behaviour for near inelastic potential flow. It is a major modelling breakthrough that is seemingly ignored by the aeronautics industry and NASA.
Horror?
Not really. Our technology is based on practicalities that work, not on theoretical positions that are consistent with the facts. Theoretical triumphs are only celebrated if some group finds an economic advantage in highlighting it. Einstein is only a "genius" because American post war propagandist wanted to show Jewish science triumphed over Aryan science! This was a powerful propaganda war that waged throughout the war and into the cold war period.
The reality was that science is not speciated like this spin doctoring attempts to do, and both sides of the cold war scrambled to get their hands on " Aryan" scientific results and research to get the advantages of the scientific break throughs demonstrated by Germanies technological prowess which had its origins in the Bismarck era.
Magnetic behaviours can be modelled by rotational "waves" in the manner that Ken Wheeler is attempting to explain .
There are 2 fluid behaviours which are not reflections of each other as in common nations of wave reflection. The rotational wave theory is also in its infancy but these 2 fluid behaviours correspond to Eds "individual magnet" behaviours, which I link to the label plasma, redefining that label and inviting a revision of current Plasma Physics .