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
A magnetic universe
A magnetic universe
This presentation of the universe, or the dynamics in the universe, simply illustrates the “push and Pull “dynamics in universe. The fundamental push and Paul dynamic in this universe is, of course, magnetic dynamics!.
This plasma magneto fluid dynamic process results in what we could call particle formation within what we might call authority field. As you can see the particle size is determined by the frequency and amplitude and also the phase of the vibration, and this is why we observe the connection between particles, particle size and field dynamics. The concept of a wave is misleading, what is observed is the ensemble droplets behaving within the vibrational pattern , And face changes coordinate to changes in frequency and amplitude so that for example ice turning to water representing a physical face change coordinates with a frequency and amplitude face change. Similarly water turning to steam or evaporating response to her mother frequency and amplitude change with significant variation according to the phase of the frequencies involved.
Behaviour of plasma is as fields of continuous medium or either particles or droplets there is an indication of how charges to gibbeted from the magnetic field onto the drop at all droplets within it. Here we understand charge to be the frequency variation of the magnetic entity .
This is a clear explanation of what the mean when they talk about the dynamo theory or generating a magnetic field.
Just noticed that you need a seed magnetic field to initiate the dilemma.
A magnetic base, is fundamental to understanding how our universe and all its forces can be theoretically structured.
It is a magnetic universe!
It's interesting that although the dynamo theory is applied to other planets despite not having ferric cores. For instance Jupiter: "The bulk of Jupiter's magnetic field, like Earth's, is generated by an internal dynamo supported by the circulation of a conducting fluid in its outer core. But whereas Earth's core is made of molten iron and nickel, Jupiter's is composed of metallic hydrogen. As with Earth's, Jupiter's magnetic field is mostly a dipole, with north and south magnetic poles at the ends of a single magnetic axis." - Wikipedia
The SO's might have a different argument with it comes to ELEs or planetary turmoil related to pole reversals...
The fundamental truth is that all materials are magnetic. Some are paramagnetic and if you are diamagnetic, and a tiny few you are ferromagnetic . What faraday found out and later developed in his theory of lines of magnetic force, was that The behaviour of matter was like the behaviour particles in a fluid. Therefore fluid dynamics and its counterpart magneto fluid done Hammicks gives the best mathematical and physical model of magnetic behaviour, this is the basis of all electric behaviour. The vortices which occur naturally in fluids therefore become The equivalent of charged particles . It is these notices at different scales which I associate with the individual magnets that Ed describes. Finally so-called gravity is a very weak effect of this magnetohydrodynamic construction, it is a very weak but pervasive charge attraction generated by varying magnetic potential.
It occurs to me that a more general definition of radiative emission is necessary.
As an initial stab at it I propose the following:
Irradiative a emission from a specified object of volume fulfils the following criteria;
(one) in a specified direction a pulse in to the surrounding medium is detectable travelling in that direction with a detectable amplitude, frequency, and phase relative to a standard regular pulse in that direction; The amplitude, frequency, phase may vary along that specified direction.
(Two) with respect to any two specified directions amplitude, frequencies, and phases are detectable and those distinguished measurements may vary with respect to the direction; these observations are time dependent and compared at the determined equivalent time.
(Three) with respect to any three specified directions, if the frequency, and put dude, and phase I found to be equal then that radio to emission is defined as a spherical radiative omission. All other determinations are defined as watercooler or spiral radiative missions.
I structure the descriptions in this way because as Herman Grossman pointed out, if this order or chaos truly exists then we cannot set out any regular rules for it! And though we may try to give a probabilistic description, all probability measures are based on 40 Kuehler what is vertical measurements within the interval 0 to 1. This is a mathematical fact that DeMoivre and Newton exploited to the great advantage.. Max was equally likely hypothesis is in fact and argument from regularity not from chaos.
If that we might as well credit Descartes with this notion of a disturbance in the plenum as the fundamental conception of a radiator omission.
Those, like Newton, the favoured a particle exclamation of radiator emission Will find that they can make this approximation further up the chain of reasoning, and though it is useful it is not fundamental. ,
Oppose I would therefore define as a change in the pressure, or density measurement of a medium. These are dynamic measurements and correspond to the measurements of both magnetic and electric potentials. However it is my contention The electric measurements are just dynamic magnetic measurements at a higher range of frequencies than that commonly measured in inorganic magnetic material.
Is it assumed that the Earth's apparent weakening magnetic field will be the cause of a much anticipated pole flip?
Leedskalnin demonstrates that you can force flip a permanent magnet with a stronger outside magnetic force, and in the process the permanent magnet strength is increased.
"...Put this permanent magnet in the coil's hole. Reverse it. Put bar's North Pole end in coil's South Pole end, run current in the coil for awhile, take the bar out, now you have a stronger permanent magnet, but the poles are reversed. This shows that the stronger magnet can change the weaker magnet."
Just a thought, but is it feasible that the Sun, in conjunction with specific planetary alignments, could "force flip" the Earth's magnetic field (a natural process that it just so happens to also strengthen or recharge our magnetic field)?
Like most folks in mainstream science Leedskalnin was certain there will be a pole reversal, but one thing he discusses that these guys don't talk about is how this process will effect the moon.
The Moon Will Come Down
At the same time it does not give a static description of a permanent magnet, so magnetodynamics is crucial to understand what Ed is explaining very simply.
My model of magnetodynamics is based upon rotational Dynamics.
Simply put a line in the permanent magnet with a dynamic magnetic field , This field being stronger not only reverses the permanent magnet but also makes the permanent magnet stronger.
Of course to view the Earth as a bar magnet instead of as a lodestone creates foundational problems in any case.
In my view the so-called president in space is where Ed called the individual north and south pole magnets in dynamic flux, and especially within the electric so-called current . The The dynamic flow of these magnetic states creates and reverses permanent magnetism in various materials . That the Sun forces the Earth to experience a circle Paul Flynn is easily understood. But on the grander scale we can look at nearby galactic magnetic fields doing the same thing to The sun.
I do not discuss the concept of a thermonuclear sad because I believe it is a magnetohydrodynamic entity, and that the Sun is condensed matter not a gas.
At last a relatively simple and aesthetic presentation of rotation dynamics. This presentation of the Fourier transform in action is actually a good conception of the quaternion for your transfer all the Gressman twistor . Frequency, amplitude, phase all the fundamental dimensions of the phoria Fourier
Super magnet man showing how faradays lines of force, many tubes are a real structure, measurable by gas meter .
An explanation of Fourier .
We live in a magnetic universe. Note how the terms ionisation describe a post-wave phenomenon, or the disturbance of a magnetic dynamic.
The applicability of rotation dynamics. M, And it is in my opinion fundamentally established. Starting with newton who attempted to give a rotational dynamic description of the movement of the planets, going through the Navia sticks equations and the work boiler behind in our days at the mathematical difficulty, which consist mostly of very long and repetitive calculations to even come close to an approximation, has been overcome by the use of computer machines.
Not to labour the point, the Taurus is the next natural starting point beyond the sphere . It is particularly important in describing magnetic phenomena and behaviours .
The fundamental difference between electricity and magnetism is that magnetism exhibits charge differentiation whereas electricity exhibits charge depletion. The charge in magnetism tends to differentiate into what we call poles. Has been charged, whether by depletion or by access we also have to define.
However we noticed that this is not necessary in magnetism as the separated charges are always present, and utility only occurs when the separated What we call electric and tends to stay in a neutral state, and only exhibits polls when there is a depletion of one sort of charge.
To be helpful a general definition of charge would be: a change in quality or quantity related to to an object which is induced by relative motion.
So for example if we choose colour as the quality if that colour changes due to a relative motion of an object then we can say that that object .
As Naseem explains, something which Michael faraday eventually concluded, that fluid dynamics explains magnetic behaviour Bestival. The investigations we undertook into diamagnetism what revealed the most complete understanding of magnetic behaviour.
Again magnetism is based on charge separation, like attracting like and the Boundry between the likes being neutral. Whereas electricity is based on charge depletion, that is w where the Boundry exists between the two polarised charge regions the neutral balance is dynamic and is established by electric action, so-called