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
Our instruments sense it by solenoid activity generating force. Our electronic materials calibrate to these solenoid displacements in " Ampere meters" named after Ampere but developed beyond his basic set up.
In space our sensors calibrate magnetism by interferometry both visual and "electromagnetic".
Really, without magnetism none of our measuring instruments would operate or be calibrated! It is that fundamental .
We simply like to focus on the spark and call it electric!! We love shiny thingsxx
Battery and capacitor design show the unheard of reality of stored vortices in chemical reactions that are guided by a suitable Inductor/ conductor. Not one sort but 2 that interweave within and around one another
Most directly we generate magnetic current by waving an Inductir/ conductor in a magnetic flux between 2 " poles" of a magnet xxx
The work of the author of a 4th state of water Gerald Pollock is highly relevant
The boundary off many regions is an active place. The ancients described it as an atmospheric equivalent. Certainly Volta founded his explanation of electra magnetic behaviour on this assumption.
A P David draws attention to Faradays Metaphysics, but rightly draws upon others in the fied including Newtons. Few really understand Newtons Galilean decomposition of force into 3 vital principles: absolute, accelerative and motive, or even that it is part of a larger Fractal structuring of space . But Faraday and others worked based on these principles .
Since these principles apply to space not solids they apply to all dynamics of space but more naturally to fluid dynamics.
It is the fluid dynamic case that was and is the most complex application of these principles and the one Newton made only a little progress on describing a measuring scheme for it. Our sophisticated methods rely on computational power that essentially apply very simple dynamic actions fractally to produce better results than achieved by Newton or conceived by Faraday/ Maxwell.
Maxwell and Faraday were at odds about the Metaphyics. In my opinion Maxwell got a fundamental assumption wrong!
Despite starting with vortices he assumed that only straight line forces existed or at least we're necessary to describe observable behaviours. Neither Newton nor Faraday limit themselves by this assumption.
The simple inclusion of a rotational force in Newtons force structure solves and simplifies theoretical discussion and description. The fact is Newton included such a force in all his principles for Astronomers, but his lacklustre students neglected it.
You really have to pay attention to DeMoivre and Robert Coates to understand Newtons general principles esprcially the rotational ones.
Today we can generate Trochoids very easily with computers, but few realise that conic sectional curves are a special subset of the more general trochoids.
Few even realise that Coates was about to revolutionise Newtons gravitational description before he died. Newton was eager to see what he had found and disappointed at his loss.
Active surfaces of these absolute force regions are the arcane research area of tribologists, that is material scientists. They will be helped considerably if they adopt a magnetic domain basis to all fluid surfaces as a primary model, using other models such as the electron model as secondary or even tertiary explanatory models. Magnetic fluctuation can then serve as a basis for describing Brownian motions in all fluid surfaces over the range of viscosity from solid to plasma !
Brownian motion as a filamentary root in a surface that is " electrically" active connects plasma ball discharge wandering behaviour to fluctuations in magnetic flux
I wonder how would be the magnetic gravitational theory of Tesla, that he would publish at his birthday!? He has some diffrence with Ed, because he though, that electricity is one kind of flow.... He found no konsensus with Einstein and said, that his theory is wrong, because there should be reaction of the timespace, that would equalize the coneshaped impression of the bodies....
The universal fluidlike medium - eather! The key is only knowing how... How to snap the gree energy from the net od eather. BTW the experiment, that neglect eather comes somehow stupid for me. (Michelson-Morley)
Very interesting to me are the pancacke-coils. The famous Tesla photo is made with such a coil behind him... Grebennikov writes about such copper-intrument (pancake rolled sheet of copper) as a some kind of radiator, that was concerned as a treatment. It must be something in this form of coils! Maybe is the key to the eather?
The sound need a medium... The magnetism need a medium (aether) - magnetic sound base
The treatment of a circuit as a transmission line is a peciality of Ivor Catt. The rotating magnetic current reciprocates in a capacitor but it concentrates in a solenoid. The pancake geometry concentrates the magnetic current but also separates out the frequencies of the rotations , it performs a simp,e Fourier analysis of the magnetic current with lower frequencies on the outside, higher frequencies towards the centre. Placing a solenoid vertical to this pancake allows the solenoid to concentrate distinct frequency magnetic currents along its length thus broadcasting on a Eide range of chanells distinctly.
The conductive cap atop this structure now oscillates very much in the Chladini fashion giving of sparks according to the patterns generated.
Capacitors therefore are types of Chladini plates resonating according to the frequencies stored between the plates.
The tesla set up demonstrates this understanding of capacitance as reciprocating magnetic current. It provides a model of how a chemical battery effectively works.
This is a very important video to begin to grasp why theoretical physicists back away from physical or topological spin.
Now Susskind explains the observed results with the theoretical thinking associated with it.
Firstly note the fundamental requirement for a magnetic field to measure " spin" or prepared orientation against output in this Case called a photon.
The description is probabilistic. That means the topological behaviour is not physically observable !
Normally for small or invisible to our senses behaviours we can induce a topological behaviour from the consistency in many experimental set ups : invariance in the results . When you get a probabilistic result you can not induce a damn thing!
However we can use a different type of thought pattern, not induction based on invariance but deduction based on a model behaviour. The model used is a complex vector space. .
Using this model we can perform a calculation called complex multiplication. This allows us to find the magnitude of a complex vector. It turns out that the magnitude squared is related to the probability distribution in terms of its standard deviation .
So we have a tenuous link between measured data set, capturing a probability distribution and a theoretical complex vector space. It has no topological counterpart in physicl space! We therefore deal with the vector space topology!!
The vector space topology can be modelled in real,space but it describes the vector space topological behaviour.
Hamiltons quatermios are such a space, found to be useful for describing out puts for otational in real opologicl space.
Careful Mathematicians do warn against conceiving quaternions as describing actual rotations in physicl space . The calculation does not determine the physical rotation only the output for 2 specified inputs!
Ok, so twistors deal in this same kind of mathematical jiggery pokery, but instead of using a pivoting arm as fundamental I use a arc segment of a specified radius.
This spatial coherence to trochoidal motion means that I am more intuitively linked to physically observable trochoidal behaviour.
So does the set up describe anything physical? The only thing observed is magnetic flux behaviours.
Magnetic flux has to be theoretically determined/ defined before we can make statements of interpretation!
Change that fundamental definition and we change the fundamental interpretation .
I make no secret thst I do not think the standard model is the only or best model!
I prefer topological rotation / vortices as fundamental fluid dynamic material points .
I need further experimental data to establish my opinion! In particular Ivor Catt does not share my opinion per se.
Capacitors are active stores. Circuits with caps in may pass certain frequencies depending on circuit " tuning" / cut off characteristic.
What is a capacitor Storing?
My opinion is vortices at all frequencies forming a Fourier sum as a Voltage step.
Because the Wakefield experiments demonstrate this reciprocating voltage step I can now consider the deformation of the transmission lines/ plates of the capacitor.
The Chladini experiments demonstrate how vibratory/ rotational deformation creates domains within and around the plates/' transmission ' lines of a capacitative set up.
In the above reply the copper coils setboutbas a flat coil form a capacitative plate, the other being any other surface linked by sympathetic vibration(SVP) that is radio frequencies generally but scales from sub sonic to gamma ray frequencies.
It I hesevactivebsurfaces that we call electrostatic surfaces, but I say the magnetic current reciprocating generates these effects at surfaces.
Hermitians as observables! Xxx
If you are struggling with Susskind Njwildberger makes it easier.
Now understand Eulers treatment of arcs of rotation and why you have to go round twice to get back to the start.
Notice how the usual orthogonal vector description for axial rotation is in fact misleading. Njwildberger shows how to properly sum two arc rotations about a point!!
again as Norman is careful to point out, these rotation arcs represent rotations twice there arc segment magnitude.
so for a quarter turn we can expect the rotation to be passing through the initial point on its way into the opposite orientation! We expect a figurre of 8 or some other Lissajou precession to occur depending on frequencies involved.
So called electron spin is far more complex than some would allow, and the probability distribution for the results reflects the fourier analysis of the frequencies involved.
Spin up and spin down reflect the transition between Lissajou patterns which are very stable dynamical ones.
The emision of a "photon" represents the precise frequency differences between the stable Lissajou patterns,
cymatic Lissajou or Chladini patterns
Vortices and rotations in the Plenum!
Was DesCartes on the right track?
Magnetic is more fundamental than electric. Xxx
So now we know what this was !
At the time this was downplayed in the astronomical community! The effect was even described as a satellite / telescope adjustment by some!
Magnetic behaviour is universal ! Oving magnetic fluxes invoke what we call electric behaviour. This is complex trochoidal space-time / aether motions. The wheel works of space .
My position is as follows. There is one and indivisible thing - an extremely subtle continuum (material medium) called ether, or aether, which is in constant motion. Generally, the ether motion is dynamic, but in certain cases and in certain small regions of space, this motion can take more or less stationary (do not confuse with static!) character. When that is the case, some specific patterns of that stationary ether motion we call static magnetic field, while the others - static electric field. We can imagine even a pattern of stationary ether motion which is a combination of "magnetic" and "electric" patterns and may be called appropriately static electromagnetic field. Then there is, of course, full-fledged dynamic electromagnetic field.
That's all there is to it. Dividing the motion of ether into magnetic and electric fields and saying that changing electric field generates magnetic field and, vice versa, changing magnetic field generates electric field, and thinking that one of them is more fundamental than the other is, in my opinion, very harmful because that complicates and confuses matters beyond redemption for no good reason.
There is this endless debate about whether magnetic monopoles exist or not. If we adopt the above outlook on the nature of electromagnetic phenomena, the answer is rather obvious: Yes, magnetic monopoles exist, hidden in plain sight; electron, for one, is a magnetic monopole, positron is also a magnetic monopole. Proton is another example of magnetic monopole. There are many other magnetic monopoles. You can even create one of your own - as I have tried to demonstrate elsewhere - but no one seems is paying attention:
http://magneticuniverse.com/discussion/comment/881/#Comment_881
Thank you once again for your continued support of this thread.
Our "disagreement" is rhetorical only, in my opinion. I am mindful of the damgers of obfuscation you so eloquently point out.
I respect and appreciate your philosophical position finding in it the expression of a kindred spirit.
For my sins, despite deploring mathemtics so called, and mathemythics if I might coin a word, for that misleading myth that mathematics is the language of God, I still rhetorically present in my expertise .
I am still,partially stuck in translating the works of the Grassmanns Justus and Hermann, who despite their general philosophical approach lean toward Arithmetic as a kind of logical absolute. Thus symbolic arithmetic ( Algebra) is a logical extension into the Geist of man and God in their view. Newton on the other hand felt it was so much inelegant rough work, not worthy of presentation until in perfect rhetorical form.
I try to connect to many potential audiences , thus space-time/aether/plasma are my cognates for a dynamic fluid medium( subtle or otherwise) which we may agree to refer to as space.
For me the fundamental dynamic motion of this medium is rotation . By this I mean no more or less than in my opinion I base my perception of motion on a derived notion of trochoidal motion.
It is derived, even contrived I will allow but it represents my expertise model By which I make assessments from first or primary principles.
Thus I have no claim to reality . All I state is the fundmental notion of my rhetorical model.
I choose magnetic because it is observed to be rotational in character as tested by a magnetic dipole . This observation is clearly dipole polarity direction variation.
From this dynamic variation I construct models for every observed behaviour.
Mathematics, rising from the status of a servant to that of a master, is the worse thing that happened to physics in the last few centuries. As was demonstrated by Claes Johnson in his new theory of flight, it would be more appropriate to call mathematical physics unphysical mathematics or, perhaps, unreflecting mathematics. The non-physicality, and some rather subtle pitfalls of highly mathematized theoretical physics, show up not only in the study of turbulence - they are everywhere, especially in electrodynamics, which is hardly surprising for electromagnetic phenomenon is basically a manifestation of turbulence in the aether - incomparably more intricate, though, compared to the ordinary mechanical turbulence in compressible and incompressible fluids.