Roy Davis and Rawls Magnetism Discoveries

[tim123]

The theory is developing...

I have always felt that the 3D space we're in is *not* the 'real' universe. I've always felt that distance, and space was an illusion.

Modern physics treats this 3D space a a fundamental part of the universe - and they assume it's rules are universal laws.

My feeling, as I've said, is that all we see is *effects* and never the *causes*, and if fact this entire 3D universe is an effect caused by something in the dimensions we can't see.

I think that distance and separation are effects caused by the creation of dipoles in the *real* dimensions.

So I hypothesise that:
- the electrostatic field is like the 'primary dipole', it is 'voltage' or 'potential' and it is the first spatial dimension.
- the magnetic field occurs when current flows between the two potentials. It is the second dimension of space.
- the gravitic field is the 3rd dimension, and it's caused by ... the change in angular momentum of the current, I dunno yet - something like that...

But all these 3 things are just aspects of the same thing - the 'universal dipole'...

So the 3 *apparent* dimensions we see are secondary effects caused by the fractured way we see the universe.

The question is: How many *primary* dimensions are there? I.e. the ones we *can't* see. I'm working on the hypothesis that there are two, maybe three...

Yeah, I know it's heavy. Not exactly sure why I'm suddenly thinking about this stuff - but hey, why not... 

[tim123]

One has to wonder about that magnetic current you talk of Tim.

It seems absolutely clear to me that a permanent magnet has current flowing though it - permanently - with zero volts.

Just like an electret has a constant electrostatic field - with zero current.

The question then becomes - how the heck can it do that?

The answer is - by having more dimensions than we can see - and in those dimensions the material behaves like a superconductor does in ours....

...and those dimensions appear as spirals / vortextes to us - which is why the experimenters Hanon mentioned found vortexes of field lines.

[tinman]

@Tim
You cant have current without voltage,even if that voltage is low,it is still there.
Current is carried by electron's in electron flow. For there to be a flow of electrons,there must be a potential difference (voltage).
You can have voltage without current,but you cant have current without voltage.

[MileHigh]

Tim123:

Why not just look up how a magnet works instead of speculating about extra dimensions?  You are illustrating the classic problem with the forums, and that is to speculate about things without having mastered the fundamentals.  That clip with the magnet in the water and the swirling bubbles is another good example.  That guy talks about an "amazing discovery" but he clearly doesn't have the slightest clue that moving charges will be deflected by a magnetic field and that explains the infamous vortex.

Tinman:

You can have current without voltage.  The classic example is a superconducting ring - an inductor.  Yes, people will be dismissive of that because it's too esoteric.  But like I had a debate once with Farmhand where people get all upset when you talk about ideal inductors but are just fine with treating their capacitors like ideal capacitors.  You can have a voltage source without any current flow and you can have a current source without any potential difference.

It might be that a current source with no apparent voltage difference is something that you won't see often in real life.  It doesn't matter, you see approximations to it in real life.  Perhaps more importantly, current sources are used in electronic circuit design all the time and your typical bench power supply with 10-turn knobs for the voltage adjustment and the current adjustment can be configured as a current source just as easily as it can be configured as a voltage source.

MileHigh

[tim123]

Tim123:
Why not just look up how a magnet works instead of speculating about extra dimensions?  You are illustrating the classic problem with the forums, and that is to speculate about things without having mastered the fundamentals.

Hi MH
If you can point me to a source of information which explains: *how a magnet works * - as opposed to: * what it's behaviour is * - without using self-referencing terms like 'magnetic domain' or 'magnetic moment' - I would be most grateful, and will read it immediately.

Regards
Tim