Negative electricity

viperousdraco

Why is there no talk about negative electricity on here? I think your all missing the point.

viperousdraco

Ed mentions it a few times in his pamphlets?

viperousdraco

Voltmeters and ampere meters are one-sided. They only show what is called by instruction books, positive electricity, but never show negative electricity. Now you can see that one-half of the electricity escaped their notice.

To the electrical engineers the positive electricity is everything, the negative electricity is nothing, but to the physicists the negative electricity is everything, and the positive electricity is nothing. Looking from a neutral standpoint they cancel each other, so we have no electricity, but we have something.

viperousdraco

Positive electricity & negative electricity are not the same as north and south pole magnets. North and south pole magnets are the force's. Positive and negative electricity are the two different function's.

Looking from a neutral stand point (when the coil is stationary, not moving) it's negative electricity. Opposed to it spinning which produces Positive electricity.

Voltmeters and apmere meters only show Positive electricity.

Have you notice yin and yang are drawn the same way ED says Positive electricity runs through a wire?

Curious thing when ED draws yin & yang he misses out the two dots.

viperousdraco

Viktor schauberger said we move things in the wrong direction, that we should reverse our direction from explosion to implosion. If you look at this illustrated copy
http://aetherforce.com/leedskalninmc/ on page 34 you clearly see the outward, explosion of positive electricity and the inward, implosion of negative electricity.

poughkeepsieblue

I have mentioned this before, but I will say it again, in case anyone new doesnt know this.
That is not ed's illustrated copy.
Ed had nothing to do with that illustrated copy. When it comes to what ed said, dont trust that copy. It's a learning tool. But ed had nothing to do with it. Ed's books come from coral castle only. I myself have used pages to identify some ideas I had, from that copy, but again, it's not ed's work, and not what ed intended MC to look like. I dont know if you are aware of that, but that copy is MC text, added to someone else's work.
And the wrong MC text as well. Typos on top of typos, and words changed from the original text, because the copier guy thought they were an improvement I assume, and he had no respect for the form and time ed devoted to writing MC in the special way he did, just for us, over the 35+ years he had to think about what he was doing.
Not ed's work. Not MC. And not trustworthy, ed didn't illustrate MC because he wanted us to be creative, observant, and do the work ourselves, to see it for ourselves, and follow his directions. His confusing, strangely worded directions, that are that way for a reason.
Otherwise, I agree, the negative electricity is important, or else ed wouldn't have mentioned it.
But I can't stress this enough, if you don't have them, order copies from CC, they are easy to get, and cheap enough to skip a lunch or 2 for.
I really wish I knew who was responsible for it, cause they omitted their name, and made it look like ed made that copy. It's very deceiving, and they deserve credit for the illustrations, and interpreting ed's experiments in the right way.... err, kind of.
This obviously is a pet peeve of mine... Mostly, just add your name so everyone doesnt think ed made those pages, cause he didn't.

viperousdraco

Never knew that was not eds work. Am with you who ever did it did a good job. I still think its a implosion, inward force as they go from pole to pole and across the wire. In magnetic current he describes it running throw the wire positive electricity and across the wire negative electricty. He makes a point to do it twice.

Kubeq_sq

HI there, CC doesn't send the books in abroad, so i have to ask: habe anyone the original scan of the MC? I must confess, till now i thought, that that ilustrated copy os oroginal!
Thanks for tip.

dante

@Kubeq_sq
I have a very old version of MC, I will try to scan within the next few days

taco1981

Im trying to get as many people to see this. Ed figured this out before me. I plan to give him credit. The PMH is a major tool in his work but its only 1/6 of the equation. Ive managed to piece it all together. Im telling everyone. I can give the world what we are all looking for. Whats scary is that Ed didnt just find out what gravity is, how electricity works, why the universe has so much energy. He discovered that applying force in the right way can cause 2 separate reactions. If the energy is kept low flowing in a certain way can cause gravity to be effected. Its not really anti gravity. More of manipulation. Later this year im having. demonstration. I have several concerns. Currently I need to find a way to safeguard my research. Anyone that can help would be appreciated. I dont want to allow thos new technology to fall into the wrong hands.

marlenewiley

Both positive and negative charges create electric fields which surround particles and exert force. All charged particles have an electric field. The convention is that electric field lines come out of positive charges and go into negative charges. You can think of electric fields as like traffic lights attached to each particle.