FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics » Electromagnetics
O.T. -- Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 67 [993 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 65, 66, 67 Next
Author Message
Ka-In Yen
science forum addict


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Flaws wanted Reply with quote

Eric Gisse wrote:
Quote:
Ka-In Yen wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Read: "I can't answer your argument, so I'll simply
ridicule it."

Dear Bjoern,
There is another equation for your reference:

tau=v^2 * mu (the equation of waves on string)

tau is the tension on string, and mu is linear mass
density of string; v is vector, but v^2 is scalar.

Your using the wrong wave equation. See:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/waveq.html
http://www.uoxray.uoregon.edu/ph351/waves.pdf

Dear Eric,
Thank you for your information. Please refer to Halliday's
"Fundamentals of Physics", chapter 17-6, waves on a string.
It is the equation of waves on a string, but I rewrite it.

--
/ Ka-In Yen
/ Magnetic force: Drag and Bernoulli of ether dynamics
/ http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee/mdb2.html
/ http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee
Back to top
Eric Gisse
science forum Guru


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 1999

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Flaws wanted Reply with quote

Ka-In Yen wrote:
Quote:
Eric Gisse wrote:
Ka-In Yen wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Read: "I can't answer your argument, so I'll simply
ridicule it."

Dear Bjoern,
There is another equation for your reference:

tau=v^2 * mu (the equation of waves on string)

tau is the tension on string, and mu is linear mass
density of string; v is vector, but v^2 is scalar.

Your using the wrong wave equation. See:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/waveq.html
http://www.uoxray.uoregon.edu/ph351/waves.pdf

Dear Eric,
Thank you for your information. Please refer to Halliday's
"Fundamentals of Physics", chapter 17-6, waves on a string.
It is the equation of waves on a string, but I rewrite it.

You rewrote it? Not surprising, you probably dropped some vector
information when you did because you don't know what the difference
between a vector and a scalar is.

If you ask an educated physicist/mathematician what the wave equation
is, you will be pointed to the PDE.

Quote:

--
/ Ka-In Yen
/ Magnetic force: Drag and Bernoulli of ether dynamics
/ http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee/mdb2.html
/ http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee
Back to top
Ka-In Yen
science forum addict


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Flaws wanted Reply with quote

Eric Gisse wrote:
Quote:
Ka-In Yen wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:
Ka-In Yen wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Read: "I can't answer your argument, so I'll simply
ridicule it."

Dear Bjoern,
There is another equation for your reference:

tau=v^2 * mu (the equation of waves on string)

tau is the tension on string, and mu is linear mass
density of string; v is vector, but v^2 is scalar.

Your using the wrong wave equation. See:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/waveq.html
http://www.uoxray.uoregon.edu/ph351/waves.pdf

Dear Eric,
Thank you for your information. Please refer to Halliday's
"Fundamentals of Physics", chapter 17-6, waves on a string.
It is the equation of waves on a string, but I rewrite it.

You rewrote it? Not surprising, you probably dropped some vector
information when you did because you don't know what the difference
between a vector and a scalar is.

If you ask an educated physicist/mathematician what the wave equation
is, you will be pointed to the PDE.

Dear Eric,
I agree with you that the equation you pointed out is a
complete wave equation. The equation I got from Halliday's
book is a equation of wave's velocity. Most time It is

v=sqrt(tau/mu)

And I rewrote it

tau = v^2 * mu

--
Ka-In Yen
Magnetic force: Drag and Bernoulli of ether dynamics
http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee/mdb2.html
http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?! Reply with quote

don't think our dave has lifted a page of that classic text.
Back to top
Ka-In Yen
science forum addict


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Flaws wanted Reply with quote

Mike wrote:
Quote:
Ka-In Yen wrote:

[snip]

Not strong enough.
F=-kx (Hook's law)
Try again, and please try harder. :)



What does Hooke's law have to do with all these?

F= -kx is just an approximation and F and x are still vectors anyway.

Dear Mike,

Thank you for your information. As you said: F and x are vectors.
What about the linear mass density of spring? The force and the
mass of spring blend together; there is no way to separate the
force from the mass of spring. The force can not exist independently.
The force is a result of material structure of spring. From
microscopic view point, electric force push/pull atoms of spring;
to macroscopic level, the mass of spring push/pull external object.
The force is a description of spring's material structure. The
force is vector, because the material structure is vector.

--
Ka-In Yen
Magnetic force: Drag and Bernoulli of ether dynamics
http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee/mdb2.html
http://www.geocities.com/redlorikee
Back to top
Ceriel Nosforit
science forum beginner


Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:27:01 +0000 (UTC),
glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:

Quote:
In article <1111196174.457106.322890@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
Bohl <aharanovbohm@yahoo.com> wrote:

hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:
In a nutshell, aren't all EM waves 'transverse'?


<snippeth>

Quote:

But I suppose he must mean scalar waves. The only analogy to scalar waves
that I can think of is sound waves. I don't think there's any scalar
analogy to, e.g., the photon or W bosons, so I can't say much about it off
the top of my head.

Two years ago I annoyed the people at alt.sci.physics.acoustics about
this. The result:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.sci.physics.acoustics/browse_thread/thread/de8df7f1f5c5f29a/3b94631793f5f796?


--
Over on the mountain
Thunder magic spoke,
"Let the people know my wisdom,
Fill the land with smoke."
Back to top
Gregory L. Hansen
science forum Guru


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 771

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

In article <1111196174.457106.322890@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
Bohl <aharanovbohm@yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote:

hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:
In a nutshell, aren't all EM waves 'transverse'?

Harry C.


Beats me. Well in medieval times, people don't know electromagnetic
waves (light) fill the air... so who knows.. perhaps other waves
fill the air too that is not EM transverse waves but its cousins
not yet detectable by present instruments.

And perhaps invisible muffins fill the air. Ignorance is no reason to
prefer one particular unproven theory over another.

Quote:

Anyway. Let me just focus on the first paragraph. Can you show
what this means "whenever an EM wave starts to
form, both the transverse and longitudinal waves start to form.
However, the transverse wave has a function, which cancels the
longitudinal wave. So if that function persists, we get the
familiar EM wave. Now when we cancel the normal wave, we cancel
the component that had cancelled the LW (scalar wave). So we get
out a LW (scalar wave)".

What function is he talking about available in transverse wave
that cancel the longitudinal wave?

It would be something novel. In free space, electromagnetic waves are
non-interacting and follow a simple superposition rule. E.g. a vertically
polarized wave can't turn a horizontally polarized wave into a vertically
polarized wave; they basically proceed independently as if the other
didn't exist. What he's talking about is an interaction term between the
transverse and longitudinal waves, one that has no theoretical or
experimental justification that I know of.

I'm not quite sure what he means by "longitudinal". If I didn't know he
has a thing for scalar waves, I'd assumed the longitudinal waves are
vector waves polarized longitudinally rather than transversely, which
is something that can happen only if the wave has mass. Which would imply
dispersion even in free space.

But I suppose he must mean scalar waves. The only analogy to scalar waves
that I can think of is sound waves. I don't think there's any scalar
analogy to, e.g., the photon or W bosons, so I can't say much about it off
the top of my head.

--
"Not that there's anything wrong with just lying around on your back. In
its way, rotting is interesing too... It's just that there are other ways
to spend your time as a cadaver." -- Mary Roach, "Stiff", 2003.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

Prescott, there is no effect to be ovserved.

The people promoting the concept of 'scalar waves' have long been
demonstrated to be flim-flam artists selling baseless pseudo-scientific
fecal matter.

Isn't it obvioius to you that if their theories and claims had any
merit whatsoever, they would have been embraced by the world years ago?


My take on the subject is that Tom Bearden (just to focuse on one
person perpetrating a scam) has been actively involved in selling his
'Snake Oil' for well over 10-years. Evidently there are enough ignorant
suckers around to keep him in business.

The fact that in 2005 there are still people remaining who are so
naive/ignorant in science to make the scam profitable absolutely amazes
me. Then too, scams based on pseudo-science have been around
throughout recorded history. Like most con-games, their success is
built upon preying on personal greed. (Evidence, for example, the car
that could run on water as fuel.)

It's as simple as that.


Harry C.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

ROFL Sucker!

Harry C.
Back to top
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

Bohl wrote:
Quote:

To those studying the exotic forms electromagnetisms can take or
its hidden richness. Which of the following do you think is
possible and which is just plain impossible and why.

The stuff below are the rantings of a crank.


Quote:
"What I call "scalar waves" are pure longitudinal EM waves (LW).

Impossible if our current theory of electromagnetism (described
by Maxwell's equations) is right. I.e. almost certainly impossible,
since that theory has been tested and used for 140 years now.



Quote:
Per a nice paper by R. Ziolkowski, whenever an EM wave starts to
form, both the transverse and longitudinal waves start to form.
However, the transverse wave has a function, which cancels the
longitudinal wave.

What on earth is this supposed to mean? What do you mean with
"function" here?


Quote:
So if that function persists, we get the
familiar EM wave.

Huh??? What do you mean with "the function persists"?


Quote:
Now when we cancel the normal wave, we cancel
the component that had cancelled the LW. So we get out a LW.

And how is this cancelling supposed to work?



Quote:
A normal old EM wave is comprised of photons (or so we can
consider it, if we wish). Now a photon is a piece of angular
momentum.

No, it isn't. It *has* angular moment.


Quote:
So it's a piece of energy welded to a piece of time,

What is "a piece of time" supposed to mean?


Quote:
with no seam in the middle, so to speak.

That would be a rather strange way of speaking.



Quote:
What the "pieces of energy" represents, in the dynamic
oscillating wave, is a dynamic oscillation of the energy density
of 3-space.

No, photons are not "dynamic oscillations of the energy density
of 3-space".



Quote:
Now here physics does an odd thing. It just ignores
the dynamics of all those "time pieces".

Again: what on earth is "time piece" supposed to mean?


Quote:
In other words, not only is the spatial energy

What is *spatial* energy?


Quote:
structured and dynamic, but so is the flow of time

Unsupported assertion.


Quote:
(I discovered the mechanism that generates the flow of
time when I was at grad school at Georgia Tech).

Rrrriiigggghhhht.


Quote:
Physicists just
visualize the "observer time" flowing smoothly, and ignore the
fact that the EM wave carries time dynamics as well as energy
dynamics.

What on earth are "time dynamics" and "energy dynamics" supposed
to mean?


Quote:
When you make what is CALLED a transverse wave you ignore (or
have a component that cancels) that time-density variation.

Plain wrong. Transverse waves *have* a time-dependent energy density.

And there is no "component" there which would cancel that!


Quote:
That is a normal transverse wave; considered as an oscillation of the
energy density of three-dimensional space, with a structureless,
free-flowing time stream.

That's one of the strangest descriptions of a transverse wave
I've ever seen.


Quote:
When you make a longitudinal wave, by definition it cannot vary
the energy density in 3-space. That is fixed.

Plain nonsense. For longitudinal waves, the energy density at every
single point varies periodically, just as for transverse waves.


Quote:
So it can only vary the time-density dynamics.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?



[snip a *lot* more of that nonsense]

Bye,
Bjoern


P.S.: Cinquirer/Landle/Qion, is that you again?
Back to top
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

Ceriel Nosforit wrote:
Quote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:37:47 +0100, Bjoern Feuerbacher
feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:


Ceriel Nosforit wrote:

[snip]


Quote:
Having briefly looked at Whittaker's 1903 paper,

What paper do you mean?


Google.

"Whittaker 1903" gives 37 300 hits. Adding "scalar waves"
reduces that to 129.

Why don't you simply provide a link?



[snip]


Quote:
I'd still like to quickly add that Maxwell was also pre-Relativity, so
his equations are no holy cow either.

Non sequitur, since Maxwell's equations are automatically Lorentz
invariant, and SR was even developed based on that Lorentz invariance!

So saying that Maxwell's equations could be wrong due to a possible
conflict with SR (that's what you were saying, right?) makes no sense
at all.


They do not disagree whith current observations. Current observations
are based on them.

Err, how do you base observations on a theory?


[snip]


Quote:
They should probably not be treated as such.

Err, I don't treat them as "holy cow". I said "almost certainly
impossible", not "clearly", "certainly", "absolutely" etc. impossible.


Then you say one thing and do the other.

Please point out where I treated Maxwell's equations as a "holy cow".



Quote:
And I pointed out *why* I am so sure about that: because they had been
tested and used for 140 years now.



How long had Newton's been tested?

Longer. And they are still perfectly valid *within their range of
application*. Hint: I say the same about Maxwell's equations.

Saying that scalar electromagnetic waves exist would be like
saying that gravity obeys a 1/r law instead of an 1/r^2 law.


[snip]



Quote:
Beware! Musings:
Maybe if every other field was revised when one advances we could see
a more rapid progression of our major fields. Say EM _was_ revised
after Relativity,

Why on earth should it have been, in light of the fact that the
development of SR was *based* on Maxwell's theory?


All of it?

All of what? Of the development? No.


Quote:
You're leavig out important info.

No.



Quote:
And, if you did not notice: Maxwell's theory *was* reconsidered in
a sense after the development of SR. Nothing was changed in its
main statements (since, as already said, SR is essentially *based*
on these statements), but a new way was found to *write* the
equations. You could try reading up on "field strength tensor"
or "four-potential", for starters.


Not sure how I was supposed to notice that...

I don't know what education you have. I simply assumed that before
someone starts spouting about "Maxwell's theory should have
been reconsidered after SR was developed!", he would have done
some research if that hasn't been already done.


Quote:
But I'll add those topics to my reading list.

Good. Try any textbook on electrodynamics, e.g. Greiner or Jackson.


[snip]

Bye,
Bjoern
Back to top
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

Bohl wrote:
Quote:
hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:

In a nutshell, aren't all EM waves 'transverse'?

Harry C.



Beats me. Well in medieval times, people don't know electromagnetic
waves (light) fill the air... so who knows.. perhaps other waves
fill the air too that is not EM transverse waves but its cousins
not yet detectable by present instruments.

Yes, maybe. So what? Idle speculations are not physics.


Quote:
Anyway. Let me just focus on the first paragraph. Can you show
what this means "whenever an EM wave starts to
form, both the transverse and longitudinal waves start to form.
However, the transverse wave has a function, which cancels the
longitudinal wave. So if that function persists, we get the
familiar EM wave. Now when we cancel the normal wave, we cancel
the component that had cancelled the LW (scalar wave). So we get
out a LW (scalar wave)".

What function is he talking about available in transverse wave
that cancel the longitudinal wave?

How are we supposed to know what the words of a crank are supposed
to mean?



Bye,
Bjoern
Back to top
Ceriel Nosforit
science forum beginner


Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:37:47 +0100, Bjoern Feuerbacher
<feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:

Quote:
Ceriel Nosforit wrote:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:02:00 +0100, Bjoern Feuerbacher
feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:


Bohl wrote:

To those studying the exotic forms electromagnetisms can take or
its hidden richness. Which of the following do you think is
possible and which is just plain impossible and why.

The stuff below are the rantings of a crank.



"What I call "scalar waves" are pure longitudinal EM waves (LW).

Impossible if our current theory of electromagnetism (described
by Maxwell's equations) is right. I.e. almost certainly impossible,
since that theory has been tested and used for 140 years now.


Having briefly looked at Whittaker's 1903 paper,

What paper do you mean?

Google.


Quote:
it appears to me that
the problem is that his results are correct; for Newtonian Law.
However, Newtonian Law is probably not applicable in this particular
case. - A unified theory of gravity and EM would be required for it.

Why?

Says so in the paper.

Quote:

I'd still like to quickly add that Maxwell was also pre-Relativity, so
his equations are no holy cow either.

Non sequitur, since Maxwell's equations are automatically Lorentz
invariant, and SR was even developed based on that Lorentz invariance!

So saying that Maxwell's equations could be wrong due to a possible
conflict with SR (that's what you were saying, right?) makes no sense
at all.

They do not disagree whith current observations. Current observations
are based on them. Wonder why they agree with observations?

What are the impliactions of this?
How does it stand in relation to Newtonian vs. Relativistic physics?

These are rethoric questions.

Quote:
They should probably not be treated as such.

Err, I don't treat them as "holy cow". I said "almost certainly
impossible", not "clearly", "certainly", "absolutely" etc. impossible.

Then you say one thing and do the other.

Quote:
And I pointed out *why* I am so sure about that: because they had been
tested and used for 140 years now.


How long had Newton's been tested?

This is both a straight and a rethoric question.

Quote:
Beware! Musings:
Maybe if every other field was revised when one advances we could see
a more rapid progression of our major fields. Say EM _was_ revised
after Relativity,

Why on earth should it have been, in light of the fact that the
development of SR was *based* on Maxwell's theory?

All of it?
You're leaving out important info.

Quote:
And, if you did not notice: Maxwell's theory *was* reconsidered in
a sense after the development of SR. Nothing was changed in its
main statements (since, as already said, SR is essentially *based*
on these statements), but a new way was found to *write* the
equations. You could try reading up on "field strength tensor"
or "four-potential", for starters.

Not sure how I was supposed to notice that...
But I'll add those topics to my reading list.

Quote:

the revision would require QM to be revised into accordance.

Err, why?

It follows the logic of the argument.

--
Over on the mountain
Thunder magic spoke,
"Let the people know my wisdom,
Fill the land with smoke."
Back to top
Bohl
science forum beginner


Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Hidden Richness in Electromagnetism Reply with quote

Dan Bloomquist wrote:
Quote:
Ceriel Nosforit wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:52:26 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
Ceriel Nosforit wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:46:37 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
Ceriel Nosforit wrote:

What Bohl is probably trying to figure out is what all the
strange
things over at http://jnaudin.free.fr/ are about. While the
usual
champion of this subject, Tom Bearden, is the subject of many a
heated
and emotional debate, these people are apparently doing
_something_.

If they were doing 'something' in the sense you imply, the
observations
would be trivial, there would be no 'dismissing' it. As no one
beyond
the claimants seem to be able to make these observations it would
seem
the claimants are not doing the 'something' they claim.

On the other hand, they are very likely accumulating funds from
folks
that don't understand how science is done. The 'something' they
are
doing is bilking marks.

I'm getting the impression from the site that there is a lot of
duplication of these experiments by other people. Could you please
take a look at it and post your opinion?

I have looked at this stuff in the past. Here is what I mean by,
'the
observations would be trivial'. If just one of these claims were
true,
all that would have to be done is demonstrate the phenomena at any
University in the world. There would be no hiding it, there would
be no
end to the excitement. All hell would break loose.

As all hell hasn't broken loose, the claims are baseless. It is
really
that simple.

-----

But that proof relies on the abscence of evidence. I should not
accept
that.

It is not a proof. And, you are welcome to believe what you want.

Yes, it is rational, but in abscence of proof has not been accepted
as
an argument.

You are missing the point. These guys are claiming 'trivial'
observable.
Yet all the countless grads and under grads at all the universities
for
one hundred years have never made these observations.

On a side-note, I've now properly read what Bohl originally posted,
and there are some really interesting points in the text.
Especially
about the assumptions Maxwell made when constructing his theory and
his peers made when reviewing it.
Our radio hosts really are in a sense broadcasting over the
"aether"
like they claim. Hehe.

I say it is fine to think outside of the box, insight can follow.
There
is a Lorentz Ether Theory that makes the same predictions as SR. But
without an observable for the extra baggage, what good is it?

But Bearden goes beyond that. He claims a simple observable that goes

unsubstantiated. I've shown you good reason why that claim is bogus.
If
like he claims, he has something he wants to share with the rest of
the
world, why hasn't he spent just one day demonstrating this phenomena
where it would count? A university lab.

Best, Dan.

http://www.cheniere.org/books/efv/Chapter_1.pdf

There is a hidden richness in electromagnetism. The problem is
what it is.

About Bearden. I was hoping he would learn from his past mistakes
and learned. Currently. He has written a 977 page book called
"Energy from the Vacuum" that is becoming bestseller
worldwide with many participants from Europe. He shares Chapter 1
(total of 74 pages) for free.

http://www.cheniere.org/books/efv/Chapter_1.pdf

If he is 90% wrong. Then we have to restart from scratch to
dig this hidden richness in electromagnetism.

This holy week and holidays, let us read the 74 pages and analyze
where he got it wrong and avoid repeating the same mistakes in
the years ahead when we are going to derive the hidden richness
in electromagnetism.

Bohl
Back to top
J_O_S_E79
science forum beginner


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:42 pm    Post subject: Re: What Electricity is really made of Reply with quote

Go Stone2!!


stone2 wrote:
Quote:
Jeffrey Turner wrote in message
102suuehfuheb53@corp.supernews.com>...
stone2 wrote:

I got my physics degree many years ago, and as I remember it, you
are
told
to think of electricity as positive charges moving along wires.
This is
for
the purpose of making the circuit calculations work out right.
Positive
charge does not really move along the wires; the protons are bound
up in
the
atoms and don't move. There are supposed to be free electrons in
the wire
but it only moves through the wire with a slow drift velocity.
Electricity
moves along the wire much faster, so electrons moving along the
wire does
not explain what electricity is either.
So, what really does move through the wire that we call
electricity?
A man in the nineteen twenties, named Edward Leedskalnin did many
experiment
with electricity and magnetism using compases and batteries and a
generator.
You can reproduce his experiments exactly if you wish.
This is what really flows through the wire that we call
electricity as
proven experimentally.
. Just like physics considers an electron or proton to be the
smallest
unit
of electric charge, there is a smallest unit of magnetism which he
calls
north and south pole individual magnets. They are free to flow in
metals,
in
the air and in other things.
Experimenting with small magnets hung over a wire carring a
current he
concludes this: Electricity is really north pole magnets flowing
out from
the + terminal of a battery and flowing through the wire with a
right
hand
twist and there is an opposite flow of south pole magnets coming
out of
the - terminal of a battery and flowing in the wire with a right
hand
twist.
(by right hand twist is meant clockwise spiral)
You can do one of his experiments and prove this to yourself.
Leedskalnin took two soft iron welding rods and connected one to
the
positive terminal of a battery and the other to the negative
terminal of
the
battery. He touched them together and held them together till they
got
hot.
He sepearated them from each other while still connected to the
battery
and
investigated them with magnets. The iron connected to the negative
terminal
was a completely south monopole magnet, and the iron connected to
the
positive terminal was a completely north monopole magnet. This
experiment
helped him to develope his theory on electric current.

Sounds like a north magnetic pole connected to a south magnetic pole
through a battery. Now if you disconnected one of the rods and it
was
still of one polarity you might have something.

That is the point. If it is connected through a battery, then the
welding
rods themselves are magnetic monopoles. According to the magnetic
theory
taught in physics, you should never have any metal that only has one
magnetic pole. They say that there is always a pole at each end of
the
metal. If you have two magnetic monopole welding rods, it means that
south
magnetic units flowed into the welding rod connected to the negative
terminal and north magnetic units flowed into the welding rod
connected to
the positive terminal. Filling these rods up with these magnetic
units
turned them into monopoles. It proves that electricity is made of the
opposite flows of these north and south magnetic units.


Leedskalnin is well known. He is the builder of coral castle, in
Florida,
containing coral stones weighing as much as 30 tons. Scientists
have been
baffled for decades how he moved them since his equipment at best
could
only
lift 10 tons. People spying on him with binoculars signed sworn
affidavits
that they saw huge stones weighing tons, floating through the air
like
helium balloons. Leedskalnin was featured on one of the episodes
of In
Search of with Leonard Nimoy. Coral Castle is now a tourist
attraction in
Florida.
You can go to this website and buy his small booklets if you want.
The
experiments he did are all well defined and reproducable:
: http://www.coralcastle.com
Mineral, Vegetable and Animal Life, Copyright October 1945 By
Edward
Leedskalnin Quote:
"The North pole magnets come out of the battery's positive
terminal and
South pole magnets come out of car battery's negative terminal. To
be
sure
it is so, you get two pieces of soft steel welding rod four inches
long,
put
them in clips and connect them with the car battery. Put those two
loose
rod
ends together until the rod gets hot. Now test each of those rod
ends you
were putting together with a small needle-like horizontally
hanging
magnet.
Then you will see the one which is connected with positive
terminal is
North
pole magnet, and the one which is connected with negative terminal
is
South
pole magnet (Like poles repulses, and unlike poles attract). You
can
change
the rod peices, but every time the one is connected with positive
terminal
will be North pole magnet, and the one connected with negative
terminal
will
be South pole magnet".
. He also detected South pole magnetic units flowing upward and
North
pole magnetic units flowing downward in the northern hemisphere,
by
hanging
a long magnet in the middle and the south pole end would always
hang up.
To
make it level, the south pole end needed to be longer. Physics
would call
this the magnetic declination, I think. To Leedskalnin, it meant
south
magnetic pole magnets going up and North magnetic pole magnets
going
down.
So, how did he levitate stones of coral weighing tons. The best
answer I
can
find is this. He changed them into South magnetic monopoles by
covering
them
with south pole magnetic units, and the Earth's magnetic field,
(the
magnetic units flowing up from the Earth) pushed up on the stones.
. I tried to reproduce this in my backyard and I made a 15 Lb.
cement
brick
to weigh 13 Lbs.. I did this twice; I only tried it twice.
Essentially,
Leedskalnin found a way to make the stones into a South magnetic
monopole,
using electricity, and the Earth's magnetic field would then push
up on
them
making them lighter. It only works at night when there is no
interference
from sunlight.

Do you have to cut the head off a chicken?

Understand what is going on here. The south pole magnetic units are
flowing
onto the surface of the coral stone or brick. Light would interfere
with the
accumulation of these south pole magnetic units on the surface of the
stone.
(photoelectric effect - light knocks the electrons off) You must do
the
experiment outside, to get the full upward push from the Earth's
field, and
you must do it in the dark to prevent the photo electric effect from
ruining
the experiment. It is also very important where you break the
connection. It
must imitate what Leedskalnin did with the welding rods.
These experimental controls are so odd, that it is not surprising
that
someone else did not notice any weight loss. You would need to do
this
correctly by chance and then be ready to weigh the object, before the
charge
wears off. The possibility of someone doing all of these right by
chance is
small.

I used a car battery charger and soaked everything with water for
conductivety. + terminal connected to a metal pole mounted in
cement,
and -
terminal on the cement brick, which was on top of a bathroom scale
for
weighing it. Ran the power for a few minutes. Picked up the brick,
turned
power off. Put brick back on scale, and it lost 2 pounds. The
brick, the
ground between the scale and pole all soaked with water. Did it at
night
to
avoid interference from sunlight; he said sunlight has these
magnetic
units
in it. Leedskalnin did all of his work on his castle at night and
never
told
anyone how he did it. He died of malnutrition, having thirty
thousand
dollars cash. You see Leedskalnin only wieghed about ninety pounds
and
only
had a 4th grade education.
I did this experiment just to satisfy my curiosity of how he built
coral
castle.
Better connections and further experimentation, I did not try to
set up
and
did not pursue the matter any further.
Leedskalnin, I believe, was a great experimental scientist. But he
was
rejected by the scientific community. He believed that what you
call
electrons is really south pole magnetic units. He thought J J
Thompson
invented electrons and they are fiction.
But, electricity and magnetism are so closely related, it seems to
be
just
calling the same thing by different names.

Out of school. got my degree in 75.

--
Ho, ho, ho, hee, hee, hee
and a couple of ha, ha, has;
That's how we pass the day away,
in the merry old land of Oz.
I see no reason to stop holding an intelligent conversation. If all
of this
is too much for your brain then go and rest awhile and then come
back.

Experiment has the final say. I am reporting what I observed. Theory
must
line up with experiment and not vica versa.
JJ Thompson never should have invented the electric unit electron, to
explain what is flying from a cathode and going through space. It is
really
a south magnetic unit.




_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 67 [993 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 65, 66, 67 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:57 am | All times are GMT
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics » Electromagnetics
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Some general Hidden Markov questions kox Prediction 0 Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:51 pm
No new posts Karl Hess (hidden variables) Pieter Kuiper Research 4 Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:33 pm
No new posts Any hidden variables ? contra@tdcspace.dk New Theories 1 Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:32 am
No new posts Electromagnetism and str - what's wrong in my formulas? Ken S. Tucker Electromagnetics 11 Sun Jun 19, 2005 7:54 am
No new posts Some Electromagnetism questions EMy Electromagnetics 4 Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:50 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: Electronics forum |  Medicine forum |  Unix/Linux blog |  Unix/Linux documentation |  Unix/Linux forums  |  send newsletters
 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0556s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0106s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]