Howdy, Stranger!

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

A Sound Magnetic Base



  • That is the best summary of God that I have ever seen. That is hard to come by as religious fanatics typically have a much narrower and disagreeable summary. Also I agree with what is coined metaphysical is the physical that we've yet to comprehend.
  • This guy [1] has a unique interpretation of (what he calls) the gyroscopic force based on LaSage flowing gravity model. He argues that this apparent deflection of force is analogous to what occures at the bounary of an inclided plane on a fan. Instead of a physical boundy, a fluidic shear wall is responisble for the deflection.

  • The philosophical is but one form of thinking nd theosophical another. There are many other forms of thinking.
    Where thinking creates fact nd also creates myth is oftennshyed away from . Both have important roles o play in the human experiential continuum.

    In both cases a common phenomenon, well observed may be presented as premise for the later assertion of more fact, or myth or even fantasy. .
    In this thread I try to balance the fact against the interesting interpretation , or the inspired intuition. I can not decide for any other, especially where I can hardly decide or myself!
    I do not exclude religious interpretation of fact, but I do prefer rigour , clarity and trueness to observables.
    For example what cn be more mysterious than a dead rock moving throug space in a ratioed way that allows us to calculate when it will return!
    We exist in a beautiful but mysterious dynamic .
  • edited November 2016
    I would encourage everyone to watch Jean de Climont's video Space, posted above by ssd510, with the attention it deserves.

    It starts with “the constitutive principle” which simply states that big things consist of smaller things, and these smaller things consist of still smaller things, ad infinitum. Stated this way it does not say much – it is a dead principle, so to speak. To breathe life into this principle, all we need is to rephrase it a little bit: the principle of scale invariance of the laws of nature. Then it leads inexorably to a number of fascinating conclusions like, for example, quantum physics – on par with Einstein’s special and general theories of relativity – is but another dead end of the contemporary orthodox physics.

    At around 2:00 into the video, we are told that the medium of space is an ideal gas. There is a school of thought in Russia, championed by one V.A.Atsukovsky who wrote a 5-volume treatise on the subject, titled “Aetherdynamic principles of Natural Philosophy” . The author conjectures that aether is a compressible gas-like medium of low density and viscosity (ρ ~ 8.85 x 10^(-12) kg/m^3, dynamic viscosity μ ~ 0.035 kg/m/s), comprised of tiny particles called amers moving around extremely fast (v ~ 5.4 x 10^23 m/s).

    Atsukovsky is a vibrant man in his 80s. I had an honor to meet and talk to this gentleman at a seminar in Moscow (around 8:30 in the video).

    There is much more in Jean de Climont video worthy of your close attention. In particular, it strikes me as a very important feature of the model he is presenting that "this aether is complying with both the Hamilton’s principle and the energy equipartition principle".

    You might want to check also a huge database The Worldwide List of Dissident Scientists compiled by de Climont.

    Btw, Atsukovsky is erroneously presented in this list three times (!), his name being misspelled in different ways as: Vladimir A. Aszukovsky, Dr. Wladimir Akimovich Atsyukovsky, and yet Pr. W. A. Azjukowski.
  • ssd510 said:

    That is the best summary of God that I have ever seen. That is hard to come by as religious fanatics typically have a much narrower and disagreeable summary.

    That is very kind of you, ssd510.

    Amused to Death

    What does God want?

    What God wants God gets God help us all
    What God wants God gets
    The kid in the corner looked at the priest
    And fingered his pale blue Japanese guitar
    The priest said
    God wants goodness
    God wants light
    God wants mayhem
    God wants a clean fight
    What God wants God gets
    Don't look so surprised
    It's only dogma
    The alien prophet cried
    The beetle and the springbok
    Took the bible from its hook
    The monkey in the corner
    Wrote the lesson in his book
    What God wants God gets God help us all
    God wants peace
    God wants war
    God wants famine
    God wants chain stories
    What God wants God gets
    God wants sedition
    God wants sex
    God wants freedom
    God wants semtex
    What God wants God gets
    Don't look so surprised
    I'm only joking
    The alien comic cried
    The jackass and hyena
    Took the feather from its book
    The monkey in the corner
    Wrote the joke down his book
    What God wants God gets
    God wants boarders
    God wants crack
    God wants rainfall
    God wants wetbacks
    What God wants God gets
    God wants voodoo
    God wants shrines
    God wants law
    God wants organized crime
    God wants crusade
    God wants jihad
    God wants good
    God wants bad
    What God wants God gets

    Why "God wants good", and at the same time "God wants bad"? Isn't God the ultimate goodness? No. What we call "good" is just as natural – and just as unavoidable – as what we call "bad". If you refuse to accept it, you are really not accepting God.

    Or, perhaps, it is more meaningful to say: you do not have the option of not accepting it.
  • edited November 2016

    May be fake ( radar, black holes are mentioned :anachronism. or a bad translation , and is steeped in mystery school phraseology ( Rosaecrucian, Ascended Masters, Masonic,Knights Templars )
    Like gravity I frame no hypothesis of God . The facts we can demonstrate are too few to tell us much about our universe , so how much less about any bigger conception . Myths we cn create are too specific to encompass all witnessed expeience how much less the greatest myth about all .

    Pragmatically we can bring together material dynamics that already exist in space. We are ignorant of immaterial dynamics which underpin these, but fractal topological dynamics is a conception that positions our experiential continuum that avoids dogmatism.

  • Extrapolate means to extend by placing poles/points in a reference frame

    Voids ce is the idea of the aether contracting and moving away from a region
    Counter space refers to counting by the exponents( magnitudes) of the exponential function
    Reciprocating means rotating through magnitudes that increase and decrease in quantity in proportions that are inversely related. Or even directly related

    Flux density is not the same as polarity Equipotential surface. The flux density or intensity relates to how powerfully a magnetic induction occurs and the resultant subsequent force ontthe induced material. The hysteresis curve of an induced material varies by flux density of induction(H)

  • Incommensurability means that super symmetry breaks down in space somewhere if a unit/ Monas is used . Thus perpetual motion is due to incommensurability . The super symmetric pattern that we may call poles actually breaks as you move from the axis!

    Coherency is the opposite of incommensurability to a certain degree
  • Dielectricity is the "ouble layer", or the positive and negative charge, so called. Maxwell called it also free electricity . Fundamentally this is an assenting to a hypothesis by Ampere which is that dynamic electricity is the " cause" of Magnetim.

    Ken tries to connect the dots of all the demonstorable behaviours and observations.

    Dollard taking the old terms reintroduces dielectric as a term . Faraday may have coined the word but in fact it is. Latinisation of a "split electric ". To assume bielectric confines the observation to 2 foms(+/-), but this reifies + and - ! these are labels for magnitudes or intensity magnitudes but not names . Dielectric is a general name/ adjective for any phenomena with this observable difference. The important relation between these distinctions is you can not get one without the other, but the ratio or proportion is not necessarily equal.

    Ampère hypothesised that the electric / dielectric had to be in a circuit ! Ōrsted believed the power around the copper rod was a vorticular dynamic that interacted with the environmental dynamic. Thus the rod was not absolute of its environment in producing the vorticular structure intuited to be there.

    Faraday and others accepted the aether and it's dielectric behaviour. The assertion or hypothesis was that the aethers dielectric behaviour causes magnetic behaviours by means of a vorticular or circuitous dynamic.

    Ken takes this point of view, schooled by Dollard to its logical and natural philosophical conclusion as guided by demonstrable observations.
    Technical terms like conjugate and adjugate are mathematically pecificity, like the Dollard word " counter- space" ! This would be Steinmetz terminological structure to apprehend his Fourier series terms that he used to formulate the measurements of his metric system.

    These mathmaticl expressions depict the measured ratios of deep experimental intuition.

    The issue is: the formulation may capture an invariant ratio or law , but can we then describe our experiential continuum by these mathematical definitions?

    The cult of Mathmythics does just that, which therefore disconnects from the vox populis.

    What we have to realise is that direct observation of invisibles is not possible. But metric systems especially proportions in those metric systems enables us to develop an expertise which enables the expert to draw analogies by matching proportions in visible dynamics with proportions in invisible dynamics.

    Today we have powerful microscopes that can make some of the invisible visible, and some of the dynamics too fast for our eyes to high for our ears or too low accessible.
    We cn check the proportions and correct any mismatch and determine more at finer scales!

    However, the danger is, in designing a device to bring the invisible into visibility we may make unwarranted assignments. Thus the most powerful microscope that can visualise gold atoms surprise surprise portrays them as perfect spheres!

    For anyone to thn claim atoms are spherical is clearly tautologically unsound. .

    I am impressed by the model Ken has built and point to the Primer lids model as a sub model of kens ideas.

    But my point is there are other models that are till feasible and other terminologies which may make Kens model more accessible, providing the definitions are matched nd clear

    For example the Bloch wall or the dielectric inertial plane LaPoint call the flip point or flip surface.

    LaPoint does not pay homage to the old experts as ken does and o creates a cult for himself and very likely misses important connections , but taken together with Kns work they provide a combined interpretation of what is dynamic that is very pragmatically useful.

    I do not hold the position that dielectric causes magnetic behaviour. I start with trochoidal dynamic of the aether bing magnetic and a mode of magnetic behaviour is called electric because it exhibits principally in organic lattice structures.

    Thus magnetic behaviour is not thought of as radiating or causing electric behaviour , but as exhibiting a mode hich has high frequncy, high mplitude and irregular phase dynamics, that is rotational interference that is constructive or destructive in superpositional ways we recognise as shocking .
  • edited November 2016
    All newtons students have omens been taught or not corrected regarding centripetal and centrifugal being opposites. Ths is not the case . The key is in the wordd centri . The motion is about the centre and the problem was what was the force toward the centre. Huxley had presented an argument based on a particle being hit by impulses toward the centre . This is called centrifugal force
    Newton presented an argument that posited an attractive force pulling the particle to the centre by continuous variation of the forces orientation around the particles orbit.
    Ths is the centripetal force.

    We were taught that the tension in a rope was a centrifugal force rather than a centripetal force! Tension in a rope that is spinning a bucket around one's head acts in both directions in the rope. But oth force directions are centripetal., because the pull on the hand of the rotator is counteracted by the reactive pull in the arm.

    The pull is centripetal . The object straining the rope by inertia sends an Inertial l force down to the hand .

    If a rod is used then the tensions in the rod is both centripetal and non contractive. The rod experiences extensive strain , the viscosity of the material resists this and when the rotation stops relaxation provides a contractive force

    So what ken is calling centrifugal is more simp,y repulsive or expa I e for e.

    It is clearer to describe interactive nd expansi e orbitals.

    There is n Bloch wall in a solenoid?
    How does that fit with kens model and Ampères assertion ?
    The solenoid is directly comparable to the dielectric inertial plane in the bar magnet.

    This means that the dielectric does not necessarily structure as a plane! It can be shaped by the material guides,ir by wires, by volume in a metal. Or a lattice structure in an organic material . The dielectric thus is malleable and morphable, but the magnetic structure is recognisably similar and in the same structural relationship.

    Just divergence and convergent orbitals will do with expansion and contraction in space modelled by reciprocal ratios inversely related exp(x) is inverse of exp(-x) and the x is " counter- space" that is a magnitude used to count ( esprcially frequency) . If it is a real value it measures amplitude . We can include phase in the frequency count.
    Conjugation has a specific mathematical meaning in this context
    People can experience convergence and divergence in many ways, force Being only a kinaesthetic manifestation of it.

  • Incommensurate triangles have to be approximated .mthe phi approximation gives a metric system that gives a dynamic model of the " field" as seen in the ferro light viewer.

  • This demonstration revealed to me my ignorance of details of material structure under pressure .
    I was taught that a liquid solidified when it oozed and the boiling point dropped as pressure dropped , Also evaporation cools but freezes ? I never connected the perfect gas law relationships because I never had to. . The triple point in the phase diagram was only cursorily examined.

    The implications are intriguing. The aether may manifest as a solid, liquid or gas or plasma depending on the inherent pressure patterns within a given space.

    I mentioned reactive viscosity in relation to action at a distance and this was I thought a complex chemical restructuring due to impact full forces on a medium. But this experiment implies that it is not a chemical reaction but a pressure constraint.
    Given certain pressure on strains the aether can manifest as a gross elemental material or as a complex combinatorial compound of elements. . The complexity of the pressure patterns in the aether is ostensibly what determines what manifests.

    It is thes trochoidally dynmic force and thus fundamentally pressure surfaces that manifest material objective form .

  • A simplified practical cyclus or circle /modular arithmetic.
    Euler pioneered these in the west , but they are of ancient origin. The hindis( Harrapans and Dravidian) devised different modular arithmetics 60, 19,10,9, etc. they were quick ways of calculating Strological events their use recently in design of coil wrappings, the abha or Randy Powell Donut coil and the original Rodin coil show dramatic effects in terms of magnetic induction and field intensity. , but more importantly the cymatic patterning of the magnetic " field" structure as produced by frequency variations in the sound frequency range.

    The oscillating of coils is not new to radio hams and enthusiasts, but the connection between electricity and magnetism has been obscured by these subject divisions.

    Here Tesla maps out interesting frequency ratios for his AC research.

  • Lol not just at the video but crazy quantum theory ! The photon like the electron is a mathematical concept that obscures magnetic behaviour and the aether

  • The Fourier series explained by an animation highlighting frequncy nd amplitude and phase. The combinatorial mix is used as a measure to compare with an physical analogue or digital signal.

    The last point is that unifmity or zero is not necessarily static , it may be dynamically zero or uniform. Thus we can not know when this uniformity might become unstable or break down . A signal may appear out of " empty space"!

    The basis of magnetic behaviour is this rotational force system of behaviours.
Sign In or Register to comment.