#### Howdy, Stranger!

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

# The Way Electricity Runs In A Wire

edited August 2012

Magnetic current is the same as electric current is a wrong expression. Really it is not one current, they are two currents, one current is composed of North Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams and the other is composed of South Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams, and they are running one stream against the other stream in whirling, screwlike fashion, and with high speed. One current alone if it be North Pole magnet current or South Pole magnet current it cannot run alone. To run one current will have to run against the other.

Both kinds of magnets are running, one kind of magnets against the other kind, and are running in the same right-hand screw fashion. By using the same whirling motion and running one kind of magnets against the other kind, they throw their own magnets from the wire in opposite directions.

If the researchers had used the same kind of equipment I use to demonstrate what magnetic current is, they would have found out a long time ago what electricity is. The positive electricity is composed of streams of north pole individual magnets, and negative electricity is composed of streams of south pole individual magnets. They are running one stream of magnets against the other stream in whirling right hand twist, and with high speed.

This indicates that electricity the same as a magnet bar is composed of two equal forces, and each force is running one against the other in whirling right hand twist, but those forces in the wire have higher speed, and both forces are coming out across from the same wire. One of the forces is north pole magnets and the other is south pole magnets. They are the cosmic forces.

• edited December 2013
This is an important model, but it is inaccurate. The spirals must dynamically contract and or expand. That is,as they spin against each other, they also expand or contract , thus spraying out or contracting into the conductor.
• edited December 2013
@Jehovajah Yes, you are correct, the contraction demonstrates voltage and the expansion represents amperage. I demonstrate this on my site in some of the demo videos that have been posted there for many years. The more tension/contraction between the two currents the harder they work to move forward increasing voltage. If you can make an animation to demonstrate this I would be happy to post it, but it is fairly unmistakable in the demos.

• edited May 2014
I have at last done some preliminary research into Gilbert's De Magnete..
http://jehovajah.wordpress.com/jehovajah/blog/gilberts-plasma
Because of the way scientists work, they are not good historians, thus my scientific including mathematic education is severely lacking in certain areas. Thank God for the internet, which reveals not only the current propaganda but also the historical propaganda as well as empirical data overlooked or buried by the propagandists.

Information is not in my mind necessarily true, but empirical data means that the experimental process can be copied to self verify. Gilbert in many ways set out the grounds of the supposed "scientific method" although we probably all know here what a scam the current administrations pull in using that as a propaganda tool.Peer review is used to undermine the scientific method, and that is the actual method that is used to maintain elites in science.

Gilbert is of interest to me because Newton and Boyle were definitely influenced by him into further alchemical and occult studies in magnetic materials and their behaviours. The word magnetic i use in Gilbert's sense. For a long long time electric phenomenon were known as magnetic phenomenon. All research was into the Magnetic Philosophy espoused by Gilbert et al.

Lorentz was perhaps the first theoretician to propose and name a magnitude called an electron, but it was another of his "crazy" ideas. Lorentz was a charismatic maverick who did scienific research by the imagination method. He imagined how something might work and then did the math. He then used experimental results to fine tune his math. the litmus test was whether his mathematical model predicted anything that could be measured. The electron turned out to be another of his happy coincidences! Poincare actually corrected his mathematics, which brought his prediction within range of an experimental result calculated by JJ Thompson about 4 years later in 1899.

Thompson had no name for his quantity, but some obscure irish scientist insisted several times that he call it the electron and eventually Thompson conceded. Thompson however was more cautious than Lorentz and in fact he carefully wotked through the Corpuscular Theory of his time in order to ascertain if his results made theoretical sense.

Samuel Earnshaw had demonstrated that a point charge was not stable in any configuration, and this meant that Thompson had to posit or propose that the electron was actually fixed within a positively charged centre or corpuscle, which came to be belittled as the plum pudding model of the atom! .

Thus the electron was not an independent entity in Thompson's model. it was part of a fluid element or plasma and it was spat out or plucked out by the high voltage sparks in a rarefied atmosphere. The concept that it was a unit quantity was also not clear, but combined with Lorentz crazy theory the scientific community began to think of it as a unit quantity and then as a unit corpuscle.

This was not supported by the empirical data or Thompson's own theory, but when Einstein shortly after proposed the electron as a model for the ```photon, and Rutherford and Bohr proposed that Beta Rays were electrons while Alpha rays were a 2 proton ion the sticky plum pudding model was replaced by a futuristic but inaccurate solar system model with shells for the electrons, which then had to be units. ( or Planck quanta)

A few years further down the line the electron had to be smeared out as a probabilistic fluid element again, but few could knock the popular planetary model of the electron and proton atom out of the public consciousness.

By the early 1900's, when the new electronic theory began to gain ground and , research into the magnetic philosophy ceased. Scientists had in fact come close to explaining "mass" in terms of magnetic moments and magnetic behaviours. This was all abandoned by academia, leaving a few European specialists marginalised, and the aether theories were dumped as not fashionably correct.

Then the war propaganda machines kicked in and science was divided along nationalistic lines and according to what side you were on. The Aryan science was supposedly superior to the Jewish science of the west, and this was just the mild way of putting this bitter scientific divide!

Much good science was going to be lost by this antagonistic display of propaganda. Much of what Einstein did was to preserve European science, ie Aryan science, in a mathematical form . In particular he found a mathematical way to preserve the Aether concepts of Europe in the now abrasive American Academic environment which was anti Nazi , anti Aryan science.

These were difficult times. One slip of the tongue and you could be characterized as an espionage agent operating behind enemy lines!

The success of the secret Atomic bomb programme meant that certain models of the atom now enjoyed a supreme status, and could attract huge amounts of government funding. There was no real incentive to rock the boat and really investigate the proper natures of these things. In addition, as a propaganda coup Einstein was branded as the scientist of the age, when he had little or nothing to do with the atomic bomb project. It was convenient to use his iconic image to announce the triumph of Jewish science over the Aryan scientific world view! Behind the scenes there was a mad scramble to get hold of these European scientists to garner their intellectual abilities and to prepare for the cold war years yet ahead,
• Ed belonged to an Era and a region of Europe where magnetic applied to all these phenomena, and Gilbert's Philosophy was still respected.
• edited December 2013
Well said, IS, on almost all points, with the exception of any intentional misleading. Ed tells his readers that the misunderstanding began with a more a naive misleading rather than any kind of deliberate deception. He explains how an inaccurate understanding had been passed down through the generations and attributes it's perpetuation more to bureaucracy, another near inevitable destructive process of a susceptible humanity.

Your main points though are the essence of the legacy that Leedskalnin intended and made certain to leave behind - that the foundation, or the most basic understanding was wrong. This is also the essence of all of the experiments he presents - to set things straight on the most fundamental level. When all modern scientific knowledge is derived from a base understanding that is wrong, not only is technological progress hindered, the products of a any new technological understanding are based on unnatural principals. I'll let others decide this implications of this paradigm.

`SOUND BASE`

All branches of science lack a sound base. Electrical engineers know how to make and manage electricity, but they do not know what electricity is, and how it runs in a wire. Without knowing it they have no sound base to stand on.

Radio engineers cannot make radio waves without electricity, but electricity cannot be made without magnets, and so the magnets are the base of electricity.

When chemists make electricity from Zinc with acid in a battery, then the North pole magnets are coming out of the positive terminal, and South pole magnets from the negative terminal. The same magnets can be used to build up some other matter, and whatever the matter is, the magnets are always the base of it.

Physicists are using one-sided equipment to chase the non existing protons and electrons, but are neglecting the North and South pole magnets, which are the base of everything.

Physiologists do not know that the North and South pole magnets are contracting the muscles for our body functions.

Geologists do not know what gravitation is, and what causes earthquakes and mountains. Perpetual transformation is going on with this Earth all the time. When atoms burst in the middle if the Earth, the magnets are running out from the middle, and so cause gravitation by attracting the matter that is in front of them, and when many magnets have come out, then there will be contraction that will cause earthquakes and mountains.

Astronomers do not know what causes seasons. All planets and the sun have magnet poles. The magnet poles are pulling and pushing the Earth in axis way. The Earth’s summer end is always a stronger magnet pole than the winter end, and that causes the Earth to slide axis way and make the seasons.

Millions of people all over the world have been fooled, including myself, by wrong drawing in geography books, in showing how the Earth’s yearly path around the sun causes summer and winter. In fact the drawings are wrong. I was lucky. I made a rock telescope and a rock sundial and they defooled me. Now I know the right path the Earth follows. The scientists should come to the ROCK GATE, Homestead, Florida, and have a look at the new drawing, the telescope and the sundial, and see how they would affect science.

The above reading, The Magnetic Current, the Mineral, Vegetable and Animal Life and the advertisement they all go together.

EDWARD LEEDSKALNIN.
5-20-46
• edited December 2013
The following article gives background on the earlier ideas of how electricity runs in a wire. It was not thought to do so. Instead it was thought to run along the wire in the dielectric and paramagnetic materials surrounding the wire. Magnetic inductance played a crucial role in transmission, which is to say that the whole energy required magnetism to keep it attached to the wire ! Without magnetism the energy dissipated , it was thought as heat, but in fact it was due to magnetism " leaving" or losing contact with the wire. This was called magnetic inductance, and Heaviside worked out an equation rom first principles in maxwell theory, called the telegraph equation. Inductance(L) was required to match resistance(R) for the whole transmission to work. A dielectric with a high inductance counterbalance a conductor with a high resistance. The conductor did not "pipe" the magnetic current it "raiiled" it. The magnetic current flowed in the inductive dielectric and was called electricity!

When Ed talks very simply and easily about this phenomenon he is telling us what Faraday, Maxwell, Tesla, and Heaviside published as theory, as well as Hertz.
Read the link and understand what Ed was saying in simple language.
The Philoophy of magnetism was only displaced when the electron was made the flavour of the month, by Einstein explaining the photoelectric effect in 1905.
• edited December 2013
I believe current moves on a wire in the same way the planets move with the sun. In the case of equal forced magnetic current 0/zero moves in the wire [the strait line ] north and south if equal rotate around the wire.
• edited December 2013

• edited December 2013
This quote sums up standard opinion on magnetic current.
Heaviside went further than Poynting. As Heaviside was working with his energy concept, he came upon a new form for Maxwell’s equations, the “duplex” form, the four equations with which we are familiar today. These differential curl equations involve E, H, D and B. The potentials are gleefully “murdered” according to Heaviside. “I never made any progress until I threw all the potentials overboard,” he later wrote to FitzGerald. With the duplex form, the symmetries in Maxwell’s equations are beautifully seen, but something was missing. Heaviside adds the fictitious magnetic current to complete the symmetry.
It is clear that even when it is dished up on a plate some reject it as not possible! The PMH shows, demonstrates and confirms what once was common understanding!
• This link to a Sardinian Museum discusses the experiment of Francois Arago , which Faraday explained in terms of Electromagnetic induction and which later Lenz exposits as a law of eddy currents.
http://www.museodifisica.it/ENG/htm/strumento.php?id=199

However, at about he same time Oersted reported that when a discharge of a battery of Leyden ars or cells of a voltaic pile was allowed through a conducting or copper wire a magnetised compass needle was deflected toward the wire.

This was immediately taken as electric current generating a magnetic field , a sphere of magnetic influence like a magnetic lodestone or bar magnet.

Arago's phenomenon was left as unexplained. Then Faraday discovered that a moving long rod magnet in a loop of copper attached to a galvanometer caused a galvanometer to deflect, according to how the magnet was moved!
His conclusion was fated by the common acceptance that electric charge moved along the wire. The metaphor of charge moving IN the wire had not yet been established. This would require the concept of a mono charge called the electrom.

In all cases magnets and magnetism were used, except for the voltaic cell. No one could comprehend the voltaic cell in tems of magnets, except Volta himself! The chemical reaction that took place was explained by faraday in tems of ions carrying charge + or –. Franklin preferred charge to be described in this way, and argued that it could be simplified to a gaining of a charge fluid and a lack of that same charge fluid. The concept of magnets was thus lost in this interpretation. A new notion of electric charge was being formulated as opposed to magnetic charge.

Arago's experiment was crucial in that it links rotation to a magnetic object. The interpretation then would have been that friction by air on the rotating copper was producing magnetism directly. Then Oersted would have been understood as friction by the discharge producing magnetism , and in particular the rotation of this discharge around a coil of copper was the same as a mass of copper rotating in an air mass, both creating the friction required to produce magnetic behaviours.

From there the friction of rubbing amber could be understood to produce magnetic behaviour and the Tribo magnetic nature of materials established in place of the triboelectric nature of materials.

The importance of rotation in developing and maintaining magnetic behaviours is barely apprehended these days. But that which is called electric is better understood as the expansion and contraction of the rotating substances or plasmas called magnetic by Gilbert.

The careful distinctions he made demonstrate the timpact that the material has on what behaviours are most exhibited. In conductors, the rotational behaviours are more evident, in insulators the contraction or expansion behaviours are more exhibited. . Forgive my use of in here for what is in fact an active surface phenomenon. The space that is rotated and expanded is more easily effected at a boundary surface between different densities of space. Although not at all explanatory, denser materials tend to be conductors of magnetic plasmas by rotation, while less dense tend to expand the rotating space by shock wave propagation. Such a shock wave propagation is still barely understood but it is usually termed as electric behaviour, or electromagnetic behaviour.

It is important to realise the universal nature of rotational motions of space. Indeed eddy currents mean rotating currents!

While it is tempting to eulogise the curved motion in space it cannot be divorced from the radial expansion of that motion. Thus straight line motions can never be divorced from curved ones in our analytical models. In attempting to do this we have gone awry.
• @Jehovajah I know some times the way I have writing , may make one think I am out of mind, how ever. Everyone has one gift, a talent , when I was much younger I won \$ 80,000 full ride to the Swiss Art Academy. I can draw anything I see. with my vision, my eyes and my mind. Information, is information weather looking right at it or visualizing based on a strict education of a subject. The video posted above our comments , and applied magnetic's as Ed teaches, shows us just one scale. Their is every thing scaled up and every thing scaled down. We can scale every thing down to a point, and we certainly can not scale it up. Most fight the idea of the Suns motion. So working a scale mankind has some understand, If you apply the Sun's motion as what I call 0[balanced push and pull[the Sun pushes as it's being pulled], to what's really flowing in the wire, and then you can visualize. North and South magnets[if equal], spin together like the red and white strips on a candy cane, or how the planets move with the sun in the above video. 5UN with in the wire and north and south move like the planets around the wire. Leads back to the simple understanding of magnets them selves . compression an mass, wave's how waterhow little waves make big waves and big waves make huge waves. Scaled or scaled down, funny how water on the ocean looks like wave's until you surf, and you surf through a tube. Magnetic current
I hope I have not in any way made you or your comments feel unwelcome. In fact I understood your style to be that of the Esoteric school of writing. Beyond typos, which we all make most of what you said was understandable to me,

The scales which you mention I refer to as fractal or Freescale phenomena. This is exactly as you describe. When you arrive at the correct " scale" it is as if nothing has changed!

http://www.cosmovisions.com/Williams030704.htm
This blog gives in Faradays own words how he conceived of Arago's experiment as electrical instead of magnetic. This was a mistake he made which the experiments show. But it was built up into electricity leaving magnetism in the background!
• edited January 2014
The tribomagnetic effect of "friction" or objects rotating by other objects at the micro and nano scale are not factored in to the discussion. The main reason is the subject boundary!
Biologists studying DNA at the molecular level are frequently astonished at the speed that molecules rotate around, past or through each other. While some suspect the " electron" transport plays a major role in many energy and biological cycles, none to my knowledge even suspects the role of magnetic behaviour.

The electron obscures this crucial rotational role in space.

If I continue using the adjectives magnetic and electric I will obscure my simple point. Space rotates and expands rotationally as well as contracts. It does this across an unfathomsble range of rotation frequencies and at all scales.

The following video shows you a model, a cgi of what enzymes do at the nano scale. It is tempting to introduce electric and magnetic fields inthe background to support our current explanatory framework, but instead I use what I observe: space rotating and expanding and contracting. For me this is the fundamental motive of space.

Gilbert's Plasma, Ed's plasma are the same thing, fundamental rotating regions of space , vorticular bubbles which form mechanical/ biological structures that behave like gears. The behaviours of attraction and repulsion are constructed by these structures of space as they expand and contract and form complex gear chain and pulley systems which may be dynamically stable but statically non existent.
• @Jehovajah ....the Sun's motion as what I call 0[balanced push and pull[the Sun pushes as it's being pulled], to what's really flowing in the wire, and then you can visualize. North and South magnets[if equal], spin together like the red and white strips on a candy cane, or how the planets move with the sun in the above video. SUN within the wire and north and south move like the planets around the wire. ..... funny how water on the ocean looks like wave's until you surf, and you surf through a tube. Magnetic current
While the sun in the wire pushing and pulling is close to a gravitational analogy, I prefer to see it as part of the whole system in which the rotation of space , the expansion and contraction of space we experience as heat and electromagnetic phenomena.

The details of the push and pull I suggest are outside the observed system. We focus on a part, at a scale and so miss the larger dynamic equilibrium system that surrounds and empowers it.

Last summer I made a careful but cursory study of so called sea waves. I noticed that they were rolling cylinders of water. The precise term is ellipsoids, but they are so elongated cylinders is a rough approximation.
I saw this clearly in the sand as a cylinder approached landfall. The sand instead of being pushed up and down was instead rolled into perfec circles hanging in the water. These were destroyed by the backwash.

While my observation was only cursory and the circles were in a distinct pattern not a cylindrical surface it was enough to show me that mathematical modelling of waves by sine functions was misleading.

In fact the navy know this to be the case, because they use formulae that involve trochoidal ellipses. So why are we told incorrect information?