PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-26, 22:41:07
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Author Topic: Simplicity  (Read 23163 times)

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Displayed is one iron wire with a coil on it and a neo attached with North facing the wire.
The coil in the center does not do anything at the moment. I placed it there as a pickup in further testing.
With the use of a neo this reader coil could never cross the Bloch wall. If I have a weak field outside then the Bloch wall is buried deep in the magnet. But this explanation is only good for this set up. The Bloch wall can excised in other ways. Right now I want the weak field. Using a neo will not give the weakest field. I would have to use a longer wire. I used a bigger bundle on the neo and just got a stronger field in at a 6" length. With the one wire setup I registered a 20 degree attraction of the compass needle. This is a result of this weak field level management scheme. I am expecting the amber monitor to show differing range of colors as the field collapses at different rates. Amber for the slowest and rainbow to white for the faster speeds.  :)
I also have a hall effect sensor attachment for my scope.

I will put a very small pulse coil on the exposed end of the wire, the point farthest from the neo mag. When I pulse this at 2hz the pumping action will show up on the amber monitor screen. The Bloch wall movement will be seen albeit small. This will show the pumping charge action that Don Smith talked about where the running circuit charges its own battery power supply.
This simple demonstration is very modifiable to change things rapidly.

If I orient the polarity of the pulse coil to cancel the flux then...
In other words: the magnet will push the BEMF of the pulse coil collapse even faster than a normal collapse with the added advantage of another field going the same way as the BEMF across the coil in its off time.
 :o 8)

I will crucify myself if I am wrong or simply change things around. LOL.
« Last Edit: 2011-06-10, 17:18:35 by giantkiller »


---------------------------
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Anybody?
This can be duplicated with coils.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw3A6yf-fFA[/youtube]


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
Anybody?
This can be duplicated with coils.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw3A6yf-fFA[/youtube]

.... with conical coil and spark between the end all under vacuum ... Russel Coils

http://www.rexresearch.com/russellcoil/russellcoil.htm

http://tesla3.com/free_websites/zpe_russell_2cone_device.jpg

« Last Edit: 2013-01-17, 09:50:50 by wings »
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
I thought the Bloch Wall of a magnet was just a myth.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Nice video....but...

How do you make a singular magnetic bowl that is a monopole?

If not a monopole, then what is the magnetic polarization of the bowls? Inside opposite outside?

If that is the case, his magnetic bowls should be painted the opposite color on the inside, yet he shows no polarization on each bowl????



---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
He is holding back on info. Yes, i believe up and down.
Armagdn03 posted with him and then Lapoint deleted the posts.
As i recall wasn't Peterae who faced 2 video jug coils towards each other?

What we do have is irrepressible evidence at multiple k
levels of materials.

Now the plasma spin is the focus. As a number of OURs have pointed to electron precession in the TPU.
  8)

But if the fields were in and out then how does the birdshot stand up and flux shows up in the ferro fluid? So evidence points to up and down also by the compass.

Bloch wall, Grumpy, Bloch wall.
« Last Edit: 2017-08-04, 19:47:40 by giantkiller »


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
Hello,

I had a conversation with this fellow as GiantKiller pointed out, and he became quite defensive and deleted everything that people could see and shut down the page except for a photo of himself.
In response to Walter Russell and bloch walls. Russell asserted over and over again that each magnet has in fact four poles, but this is hidden to us through our method of attack. The bulge in the iron filings of around the center of a bar magnet show this, as does the video referenced above. The bowls are NOT monopoles. They are oppositely polerized, each has a north and south, but they are both inverses of each other. More to come....
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
That video is an hour long, so I haven't watched all of it yet.  Can someone get to the point of it all?


Maby and Davis came to the same conclusion:
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
And Bill Gaede has this to say:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evfUTmx0uh8


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Grumpy

I believe is was Howard Johnson as in the Howard Johnson magnet motor who mapped the magnetic field with precision instruments and found every textbook is incorrect. It is exactly as indicated in the diagrams you have posted and I have also built sensitive magnetometers and came to the same conclusion.

Imagine that, all the experts are apparently incorrect yet again, I wish I could say I am surprised but unfortunately I'm not. At the center of every magnet is a neutral zone of zero magnetic field and I have measured the field down to 1/10 of a mm at the surface of the magnet. In fact at the surface the polarity can flip from one polarity to the other through a motion of less 1/10 of a mm however that was the lowest increment I measure to. I believe this relates to Earnshaw's Theorem as I have found the same instability when using two fields in levitation experiments. This instability may relate directly to the phenomena of magnetic resonance.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
And Bill Gaede has this to say:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evfUTmx0uh8

interesting

what does he say about electricity?
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
I finally got a chance to watch the video and it was actually kind of comical how he put such a mysterious spin on all of this. A couple years ago when I started getting serious about magnetic bearings the second day of experimenting I basically figured out everything he was showing in the video.
He is simply using two ring magnets nothing more and if you take two ring magnets in attraction a distance apart then the ball bearings do concentrate in the areas of greatest field density and all of them do repel each other as shown in the video. I used this trick in my first ball bearings which did not need a cage to keep the ball bearing separated because they naturally repelled one another in the presence of a magnetic field. It is the field density which holds the ball bearing in place between the magnets and the fact that each ball bearing is magnetically induced with the same polarity which keeps them apart.

I would guess he is simply using a magnetic material and casting it in with a ceramic binder to produce two bowl shaped ring magnets with a North polarity outward and South polarity inward and vice versa. The rolling bowls and the repulsion of a ball bearing was kind of neat but I have done similar experiments and it is easy to explain. People might make the mistake of assuming there are two fields here when in fact there are eight, each bowl has two fields and each red and blue bowl in attraction has four fields present. As well it is not generally understood that when two opposite fields merge they become zero, we could say +1 or N plus -1 or S = 0 however part of the trick is knowing where the zero is.

Now if we take a red and blue bowl in attraction then the field sums to zero at the exact center between the bowls and it also sums to zero at the division between the N-S polarities in each bowl. This is why if you try and drop a ball bearing down the center hole of any ring magnet is sticks at the mid-point in the center or zero point as shown in the video. So in the video the external fields simply converge at some external point of balance which is why the ball bearing is not repelled as he said in the video it is in fact "balanced" at a point near to where the two external fields merge. It is not repelled it is attracted to an external point which is why when the magnets move or the field spacing changes the ball bearing moves.

I imagine these field interactions may seem a little bizarre but it is really no different than throwing two rocks in a pond and creating two circular wave forms. Where the two wave forms meet an interferece patterm is created which is not like either of the original wave forms. I don't like to use the term Bloch wall anymore because it refers to a region between magnetic domains so I generally use a term coined by Wesley Gary which is the neutral zone. I use the term zero point as well but that can get confusing with all the Bearden/###### stuff however it may apply in some way.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Guest
I finally got a chance to watch the video and it was actually kind of comical how he put such a mysterious spin on all of this. A couple years ago when I started getting serious about magnetic bearings the second day of experimenting I basically figured out everything he was showing in the video.
He is simply using two ring magnets nothing more and if you take two ring magnets in attraction a distance apart then the ball bearings do concentrate in the areas of greatest field density and all of them do repel each other as shown in the video. I used this trick in my first ball bearings which did not need a cage to keep the ball bearing separated because they naturally repelled one another in the presence of a magnetic field. It is the field density which holds the ball bearing in place between the magnets and the fact that each ball bearing is magnetically induced with the same polarity which keeps them apart.

I would guess he is simply using a magnetic material and casting it in with a ceramic binder to produce two bowl shaped ring magnets with a North polarity outward and South polarity inward and vice versa. The rolling bowls and the repulsion of a ball bearing was kind of neat but I have done similar experiments and it is easy to explain. People might make the mistake of assuming there are two fields here when in fact there are eight, each bowl has two fields and each red and blue bowl in attraction has four fields present. As well it is not generally understood that when two opposite fields merge they become zero, we could say +1 or N plus -1 or S = 0 however part of the trick is knowing where the zero is.

Now if we take a red and blue bowl in attraction then the field sums to zero at the exact center between the bowls and it also sums to zero at the division between the N-S polarities in each bowl. This is why if you try and drop a ball bearing down the center hole of any ring magnet is sticks at the mid-point in the center or zero point as shown in the video. So in the video the external fields simply converge at some external point of balance which is why the ball bearing is not repelled as he said in the video it is in fact "balanced" at a point near to where the two external fields merge. It is not repelled it is attracted to an external point which is why when the magnets move or the field spacing changes the ball bearing moves.

I imagine these field interactions may seem a little bizarre but it is really no different than throwing two rocks in a pond and creating two circular wave forms. Where the two wave forms meet an interferece patterm is created which is not like either of the original wave forms. I don't like to use the term Bloch wall anymore because it refers to a region between magnetic domains so I generally use a term coined by Wesley Gary which is the neutral zone. I use the term zero point as well but that can get confusing with all the Bearden/###### stuff however it may apply in some way.

AC

I pointed almost all of this out to him, and he said that it was the geometry of the bowls which was the real "secret". I pointed out the X field antennas (http://www.rexresearch.com/harteh/ehfield.jpg), the EH antennas, the work done by Hans jenny showing circulations which were congruent, alchemanual (http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb275/tortuga0303/Manual.jpg) etc... A thousand examples expounding on the same concept. He dismissed it all saying it was all "WRONG WRONG WRONG", and that nobody had figured this out yet.  Here are a few of his comments to me....

"Birkeland actually did more relevant research many years ago, but again he had his magnetic fields all wrong"
 "You also might want to study the work of Hannes Alfvin. He was close than Russell but still didn't have it."

Concerning Russell...
 "Wait until you see the tech I am coming out with. It is way beyond what Russell even dreamed of. He and his mystic ideas lead an otherwise brilliant man astray. The mind does not create matter. He was totally wrong on a lot of stuff. A lot."

I like the work he did in the visualization department, and his plasma experiments would mate very nicely with the Philo T Farnsworth Multipactor Tube, and perhaps he has already thought of this, but he was very defensive and felt I was attacking him. The reality was, I was pointing out where the information already existed, was being implemented, and some directions he could take it. I will be interested to see where he plans on taking this.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
I pointed almost all of this out to him, and he said that it was the geometry of the bowls which was the real "secret". I pointed out the X field antennas (http://www.rexresearch.com/harteh/ehfield.jpg), the EH antennas, the work done by Hans jenny showing circulations which were congruent, alchemanual (http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb275/tortuga0303/Manual.jpg) etc... A thousand examples expounding on the same concept. He dismissed it all saying it was all "WRONG WRONG WRONG", and that nobody had figured this out yet.  Here are a few of his comments to me....

"Birkeland actually did more relevant research many years ago, but again he had his magnetic fields all wrong"
 "You also might want to study the work of Hannes Alfvin. He was close than Russell but still didn't have it."

Concerning Russell...
 "Wait until you see the tech I am coming out with. It is way beyond what Russell even dreamed of. He and his mystic ideas lead an otherwise brilliant man astray. The mind does not create matter. He was totally wrong on a lot of stuff. A lot."

I like the work he did in the visualization department, and his plasma experiments would mate very nicely with the Philo T Farnsworth Multipactor Tube, and perhaps he has already thought of this, but he was very defensive and felt I was attacking him. The reality was, I was pointing out where the information already existed, was being implemented, and some directions he could take it. I will be interested to see where he plans on taking this.

Ah, Yes... The 'Mystery' and 'Everybody has it all wrong' guru. We have seen that the open source, free energy constituents actually do know about this. As I have said in the past 'We need a good, dumb prairie dog'. But it is good to see somebody that will take the heat on this. For us? Why waste a good disaster when one can capitalize on the derision.


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
That video is an hour long, so I haven't watched all of it yet.  Can someone get to the point of it all?


Maby and Davis came to the same conclusion:


Hey grumpy! In what book did you find that photo? I am not familiar with it.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Hey grumpy! In what book did you find that photo? I am not familiar with it.

I hacked it out of an Amazon preview of one of the books on magnetic stuff by Davis and Rawls.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Magnetism_and_its_effects_on_the_living.html?id=HcFqAAAAMAAJ

http://www.magnetage.com/Books_2HD4.html

   
Group: Guest
I hacked it out of an Amazon preview of one of the books on magnetic stuff by Davis and Rawls.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Magnetism_and_its_effects_on_the_living.html?id=HcFqAAAAMAAJ

http://www.magnetage.com/Books_2HD4.html



Awesome thanks so much!
   
Group: Guest
Does anybody have a copy of this book?
   
Group: Guest
I posted this on his facebook wall, we will see how quickly it is deleted!!! HA HA HA


"Something you might find interesting to consider. Almost all previous considerations of such field interactions were depicted as inverse cones with the apex facing one another...Why is this? Because the magnetic field acts toward the spherical, while the electric field acts towards the radial. It is only where the two meet at 90 degrees to one another (pointing vector) do we experience what we know as "power". In an arrangement where the two are juxtaposed, (such as your setup with cathode in center, anodes outward (radial field gradient) ) You will find the pointing vector aligns with the conical photos given by many before. Often I believe things are dismissed as "crazy" or "wrong" before they are understood. There have been many assertions also that a bar magnet has four poles, not two...which is in perfect agreement with your assertions. Its not the shape of the magnet which is interesting, but the inherent field shape of natural bodies. I know you dismiss him as being wrong, but Walter Russell made VERY similar statements, however many do not understand him as he re-coined terminology to be more accurate. His findings were validated by Westinghouse, Raytheon, and NORAD (I have some of the original test results). This lead to the discovery of Deuterium, tritium, Neptunium, and plutonium in their exact locations on the periodic table. It would be hard for a crazy man to accomplish this, and have it validated if he was "wrong"."
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
hello Armagdn03
Quote
(http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb275/tortuga0303/Manual.jpg)

That's an interesting photo, a while back I did some neat thought experiments relating to this. What if we could retain the knowledge we have yet also try to imagine a completely unbiased view of the natural phenomena we see. To see a phenomena through the eyes of a child in a scientific way without bias.

Then I looked at the magnetic field, this action at a distance and considered that we may have it all wrong as there is no conclusive proof the field is the sole function of the magnet in itself. We could use an analogy here, if I blow a bubble under water and had no comprehension of water then is the bubble something in itself or a lack of something which would be the water or is it both?. Now if I were a fish it would be natural to conclude the bubble is something in itself and I could call this phenomena a field and try to relate everything else to it however the fact remains that I would be missing half of the bigger picture due to my perspective.

As well I believe it was Faraday who originally coined the terms "field" and "lines of force" and the literature before this time had a very different and more open minded perspective concerning what it was. In any case my current model of the primary fields dictates that they are not actually a field as we understand them at all. Matter continually absorbs and radiates energy in discrete packets but where does it absorb the energy from and where does it go and has this energy been changed in some way?. Now if all External EM energy sets matter in oscillation in some way then a change in the energy state of matter must effect this EM radiation forming a type of interference pattern external to matter appearing as a "field" from our perspective.

It may very well be that in this case we have been completely mesmerized by the bubble we have categorized as a field and completely ignored the water. It also helps if we understand that there may be no set frequency or wavelength ... it is many or possibly all of them combined. It is an interesting model.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Guest
"A confirmation of the vortex nature of magnetism may be found in ‘Magnetism and its Effect on the Living System’ by A. R. Davies & W. C. Rawls (Acres, Kansas City). They claim that with the help of a cathode ray oscilloscope the energy emitted from the pole of a magnet can be photographed to show rotating small cables rather than lines of force as generally assumed."

http://www.health-science-spirit.com/energy.html

DC.
http://keelynet.com/energy/rawls1.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=19579
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
GK, I believe you are correct, when a magnet is added at the end of the coil, maybe leave a tiny gap as well, the back EMF will be more pronounced because the core magnetization will not just decay to zero but flip polarity and increase up to what the magnet produces.  All of this assuming opposing the magnet's field.

Are you trying to measure the domain wall propagation velocity with that compass?   :-\
If so, Get yourself two coils or mag sensors, spaced apart by some distance, with equal length probes and look for the delay, could be in the nanoseconds.

EM
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
Hello all you OU yuppies. lol

Well, after a good time unplugged with all my time on my workbench, I am finally deprogrammed from SM, TK and gang and a host of other secret holding nimrods that are only on this planet to confuse the hell out of us and waste precious life and energy. Halla-f'n-luya to that. May they all find themselves stuck in a hole full of the same burning oil that they all perpetuate by their non-humanoid laden actions. Phew......

I just read and like this thread started by @GK back in January 2013.

Yes the Primer Fields (PF) idea looks extremely promising especially for me that has been investigating that the field comes from outside (ether) being compressed onto and directed by the pulsed medium, but time will eventually tell us all the facts.

The idea of the PF looking at a real event occurring in our Universe everyday falls in perfectly with @Erfinders' first rule of OU, look to nature. Solid proof to realize that the final effect is right in front of us and we cannot deny the effect is real. The inverse bowl explanation holds very well when you attack the idea from all angles, it still holds true or plausible. This is just fantastic and the implications are indeed enormous.

Back at the beginning of March when I first noticed this PF bowl design (was working and had to finish up some other tests), I decided to work out a drawing of how to try and replicate the effect with coils, as @GK so instinctively mentioned. Force of habit to always extrapolate nature to replicable events. hehehe

Below is the drawing I made then showing the coil relations but I had not posted it yet on my Understanding OU thread at OU.com. I think it is better posted here and I will post it there as well. hehehe

So here we can consider that P1 attracts the ether in a polarized manner where on the left side of the P1 you produce the required polarity. P2 and P3 act like the two PF rings attracting as well and creating a concentrated ether stream through S1 as the output. That sounds like super crazy man. But maybe this is the way to start thinking on how to manipulate the ether. Attract it (we do that all the time), compress it and direct it (we presently leave the last two parts to toroidal cores or lamination cores or direct coil-to-coil interactions in order to achieve our mischievous couplings).

I remember when @otto was doing his ECD tests (device using two ring levels plus three pulsed coils), I was wondering to myself if the two levels could act like a beam maker, so I asked @otto if he could do a field map using his compass and after trying it he indicated  that there was a spot a good 6 feet or so above the ECD that showed some field anomalies. What could shoot up that far from the ECD? Hmmmmmmmmm. Could it be an energy tunnel like in the PF? The funny thing is the ECD has two rings, one bigger then the other (P2 and P3 analog) and the three coils could be simply attracting ether into the ring vicinity (P1 analog), hence the anomaly @otto noticed above the unit. Very bizarre coincidence?

We have to start getting away from all the mundane stuff, pulse P1 to impress S1 via a core. We already know that works to even good degrees but we need more. So here, P1 is simply required to create an ether field presence (calling in the ether troops) where one particular field polarity can be "infinitely" (big word) compressed by the two other coils and projected or beamed outwards through the S1 collector coil. This basically could create a true ether sink and what flows down the sink drain is ether energy that will need to be harnessed once an optimal S1 is developed. 

These are the coil topologies and strategies we need to inspect. How to manipulate the infinite ether presence. Here there is no coil to coil relation in terms of standard coupling so you cannot expect the same results, the same dreaded flyback, or, the same coil-core-coil battles. Here we simply use the coil to attract the ether field and try to guide it via other coils into a more compressed and faster moving nature that we can then harvest. The prime element is ether so it is totally invisible to our regular senses. It is like working blind and it will take many many trials to get it right, but this would be a valid out-of-the-box way to consider the ether in our practical daily experiments.

This will be easy to try out indeed.

wattsup

PS: I added the word " wattsupprimerfieldscoil " to the drawing and to this post in case anyone sees the drawing without this post, they should be able to find this thread if they google that word.



---------------------------
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4045
Well
Since we like simple,perhaps a thought?
we play in ambient and try to effect "anomolies" that can be observed [as per this thread ]

Have any of you Upped The density?
Perhaps 90 times and played in "water"?

?
And of course there is this...
Qoute
What actually happened in the water experiment?"

This is also very interesting...... as you may recall, the units vibrate or pulse when in operation, well.... when you submerge them in water they exert physical movement against the body of water. The amount of hydraulic pressure they can develop is HUGE ! I can not emphasize this point enough. Now think about the associated problems... ?
When the units are operated in the open air or held in the hand there is no problem because the air acts as a spring or cushion. in the water, however, the units have a solid substance to act against. Can you imagine what can happen?

thx
Chet

   
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 22:41:07