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
Even more direct illustration of principles of magnetic dipole interactions. . But remember 2 flux vortices are involved not one with positive and negative action!! Xx
While the vector is processing it is not describing the actual variation in space.
It is describing a variation in what data is measured.
The magnetic resonance of a material may be a bulk material property like the bulk strain coefficient , and may be in fact measuring the same underlying behaviour.
The question arises ; how is the net magnetic vector turned through 90° by the magnetic pulse set to RF ?
The B field surfaces within a solenoid are highly parallel. In cross section . Thus in a solenoid the B field is a cylindrical concentric set of ' tubes' . However that is a mathematical / geometrical ideal. When we investigate the physical behaviour we see observe a dynamic equilibrium in compaction . That compaction is a vortex , and not just one vortex, but 2 super posing vortices!
By setting vortices at right angles to each other we establish a dynàmic that can torque to an angle of 90°
The dynamic means that we do not get a static system we get a vibrational or trochoidal one. That is why we use frequency or signal measures to measure these trochoidal systems .
The gradient fields like a stroboscope causes a dynamic stability in the data . When we measure we get an invariant result tied to a specific reference in the gradient field. It is this invariant result we interpret as a signal from a specific region.
We get different signal patterns characterising different materials and by differentiating we can conclude different materials act in the same region in superposition or chemical combination
A bit of fun to give readers a consolidating memory hook.
Imagine now that cymatic patterns are set up in the body by these magnetic stressors. So rather than protons being necessary we may equally describe the pattern by vortices in cymatic strain patterns, Skyrmions dancing in the magnetic ocean of the body under the influence of radio frequency pulses. Then we stop and" listen " to the echoes as they die away.
The particle analogy is entirely replaceable by a trochoidally dynamic space-time or aether. . For Mathematikos or astrologers shape is fundamental, but for mechanics, engineers and physicists who are not mathematicians aether is fundamental as a substantive space entity. Plasma is just another name for an observable manifestation of the aether concept , or a workable model of an aether.
And the fundamental motion of aether is a trochoidal dynamic. We call it's manifestation magnetism and crazy magnetism we call electricity ! But the frequency , amplitude and spatial dynamic of aether we are only able to see and feel and sense a glimmer of .
Rev up your engines folks and lets Ride! Xxx
A magnetic black hole!
The magnetic sun. Pick a feature and watch it change . The stability of these features is a clear sign of rotational dynamics .
The complexity of the large scale features is a testament to fractal topological dynamics .
Both Steve Jobs and Benoit Mandelbrot died in October
Without their work we would still be debating gravity as a fundamental causative structure rather than magnetic/ rotational surface forces in a fluid entity called space-time or aether
Charge force law. I mentioned in that the notion of charge density which is a volume force density .
I want to derive a similar relation to the magnetic force. But first I have to explore the notion of density in the Newtonian measurement scheme. In addition, the magnetic dipole law tends to favour a lineal expression rather than an inverse square expression . This may be an oversimplification based on Biot Savot reasoning rather than Ampéres scheme.
The roots of the mathematical density notion go back to Archimedes. The hydrostatic force behaviour around solids permits a notion of difference in material constituency based on an incompressible fluid. Usually water is used, but more accurately water with a specific gravity coefficient, as not all water is the same!
The connection between water and gravity is the notion of volume. In Newtons day it was called bulk. And the bulk of an object could be measured by the amount of water it displaced or by how high in the water it floated.
Clearly absorbent material present a specific problem, but ingenuity meant that most materials could be measured hydrostatic ally.
Again the water vessels used to hold the water could be given extensive magnitudes which meant that a factor form could be used to describe volume. Thus measuring vessels eventually could be marked in a scale defined on a standard arithmetical cube! Thus no matter what shape the material took its volume could always be measured.
It is the volume of displaced water( specified water) that is foundational to the notion of density.
The density of an object is measured against a uniform volume of water by scales . Thus a volume of water equivalent to the volume of the material is balanced against the material itself. . When balance is achieved the force balance determines the relative density.
Thus if a material weighs ( a force) more than its equivalent volume of water then it is denser than water and will usually sink. . How many times denser than its equivalent volume in water can be measured by adding volumes of water to achieve a balance.
Specific gravity of a fluid may be assessed in a similar way, although handy floating scales are often used for rough work.
So density, although it utilises gravity is in fact a volumetric ratio. Underlying these volumetric ratios is the dynamic balancing of forces .
Much of our measurement schemes are based on tables containing careful distinguishing measurements. The most useful tables are ratio tables.
Philosophers and astrologers have spent centuries tabulating the sine ratio for example . If this ratio was ephemeral it would have been a colossal waist of time. But logically this ratio is invariant , certain and definite to the best of our abilities.
Does it reveal a truth in nature? No!
It reveals a truth in our interaction with space-time or the aether: that is if we can truly construct the right triangle or rather orthogonality in general then we can measure certain relationships between extensive magnitudes. The mysterious magnitude is the arc ! In fact the diagonal of certain quadrilaterals are mysterious in ratio format.
So we found that ratios provided a mental certainty that direct measurements never can no matter how precise. But the proviso is certain ratios are not reducible. Unfortunately these came to be known as incommensurable, then irrational and finally as monsters to be avoided. This was the outcome of a rapid descent into the Number schema from the Arithmos schma of the Pythagoreans.
Certain magnitudes existed in a harmony with others, and that harmony was a ratio. The magnitudes themselves existed within certain forms that were standardised , not as stand alone magnitudes . These standard forms were mosaics called Arithmoi.
The unit square constructs the incommensurable magnitude of the diagonal.. This incommensurable is in fact the unit of all such incommensurables. These incommensurables were called proto Arithmoi , we call them primes! The myth of the Pythagoreans being dismayed by incommensurables is myth. The political intrigue associated with Pythagoras is founded in fact.
So the Arithmoi are the fundamental topological entities which we transform to count, measure , compare sequence combine arrange and so much more.
The Shunyasutra are forms based primarily on circular arcs, but they are trochoidal forms. These forms are reminiscent of natural aether forms. Using these forms to describe volume or rather define the volume of a liquid is how we interact with space-time.
So spacetime means that volume is dynamic. For a volume to stay constant it must be in a spacetime equilibrium mode. This the active forces within, on and around a volume are in a dynamic equilibrium. The ratio of these dynàmic equilibria within volumes is the fundamental physical dynamic it is specific to an element often and identifies force equilibria within that material.
The fundamental force dynamic is is trochoidal rotation or magnetic.
For the sake of this pst we will say a watery entity.
It s a bounded entity bounded by Arithmoi or shunyavdtra . These surfaces are trochoidal rotationl surfaces in dynamic mode., due to the trochoidal force dynamic
Thus a volume is a dynamic entity with rotational dynamics at its surfaces as well as totationl dynmics within the body of the volume . These dynamics can be locally depicted by Fourier transforms for 3 dimensions. I prefer to use quaternion fouriervtransgorms to model these force dynamics within a given volume .
These quaternion Fourier Transforms I have denoted as Twistors . To be precise they are called Grassmann Twistors.
Density is a ratio of these Grassman twistors.
The equation for gravity may now be formed .
The extensions of the form define the period of the analysis , and so the volume factors determine the 3 periods of a 3d Fourier analysis. The Fourier transform derived from these measurements sets a baseline for the rotational description of the volume.
The next phase relies on MRI and NMR.
This uses magnetism to perturb the material of the volume enabling Fourier transforms to be estimated dynamically. We can use these techniques to verify the volume and the volume behaviour, by means of fast computation.
The FMR enables regional variation to be recorded and displayed.
Thus I can replace the complex Fourier expressions by a nuclear magnetic resonance density within a material , and thereby indicate how mass is some coefficient multiplying this magnetic density.
The magnetic behaviour now becomes a revealing probe into the invisible wheel works of the aether.
A volume of space is no longer an abstract concept, it is a fluid volume of a material aether / space-time in trochoidal dynamics.
You might shudder at this Maths gobble de gook! However think of the pictures. We can draw pictures by using these things in a computer. Thus we can draw any volume shape in 3d . It's not easy, but our computers can do it.
But now we can draw not only straight line pictures but wobbly ones! So we can draw crazy signal pictures. That is how we can draw the insane trochoidal dynamics of the materials in our MRI scans.
Are the drawings real?
They are the best we can do at the moment
Don Scott challenges a magnetic interpretation of the sun
The anode tuft, voltage and proton and electron are used to draw analogies in electronics and high electricity physics.
A magnetic current and a PMH will feature in any magnetic / rotational explanation.
The magneto sono Thermo electro complex .
The magnetic behaviour of materials is thoroughly explained here by a particle model. . But the measurements are done by rotating behaviours . Note how volume and density phase, frequency and amplitude are what are actually measured. The duration of these effects are the factor we experience as electric! The magnetic sensitivity in a volume as measured is unbelievable!
A volume of material has a magnetic resonance density . This is a different measure of material density based on the volume of a liquid like water . We can use this to redefine density but effectively we are only changing a scalar in the ratio.
Free induction decay is what induction looks like in a material volume. Thus electric induction caused by magnetic behaviour shows up more strongly in organic materials because that FID lasts longer. In a conducting material this fid is so short it was assumed to be non existent. However it transmits to an organic body which registers it as a shock! Later Ōrsted pointed out the magnetic current was actually there although it was called an electric current by then.
Because the FID is being produced by a so called chemical reaction the half life decay of the agnetic behaviour in that chemically active volume called a battery produced a seemingly continuous current . We know that chemical interaction decays over time too!
While Volta could not measure what we can, he formulated a hypothesis based on the atmosphere ( fluid) around materials interacting. This fluid is best described as magnetic behaviour which is so sensitive to tribological contact , but it was inevitably described as electric because organic material have this greater FID.
So what about permanent magnets?
If you think about it we do not have permanently electrically charged objects, because it always decays, but magnetic behaviour seems to exist as a fundamental basis of electric phenomena.
What I mean is simply that magnetic behaviour is basic and universal . Variations in magnetic behaviour is the fundamental measure of the aether/ space-time dynamics.
This is a magnetic imaging analogy of sunspots and coronal hole images on soho .
The explanation is not an electron proton explanation but a magnetic signal explanation . The anode tufts are magnetic structures equivalent to the mythical monopole . This is a cymatic interference pattern behaviour in the magnetic behaviour.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/68/9d/52/689d5260f31947bbd24fb301ce02ee12.jpg
The dynamic nature of the aether in space-time. This snap of the evolution of bubble tracks over a short instance reveals spatial distribution of cymatic dynamics near a collider .
A particle description is not necessarily the best depiction of these intense high frequency behaviours , but the clear rotational and trochoidal dynamics support a magnetic (NMR) description of a volume of material in this case a fluid .
These 2d images however give only an inkling of what nay be happening in 3d .