Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[TheoriaApophasis]

The shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and the shortest Time between two points is a curved path!

Agreed on ALL    


However time and motion are just co-eternal attributes of the "same egg". 

The shortest point of LOW PRESSURE SEEKING magnetic centrifugal movements is (of course) ALSO A CURVED PATH to centripetal reintegration.


Proving yet again that SPACE is just a human perceptual mind skr3w of field mediations / overlapping/ divergences / convergences  etc etc etc  charge / discharge.




I just got done resetting my experiments (that Ive done many times already),  Ill publish it in my 3rd edition, I got result I did NOT EXPECT  (but should have!!!!!!!)  regarding biological non-living (will explain in the book) magnetic effects 3D effects that will make your head POP OFF your shoulders.

I wont mention it here in any detail, I want it set it stone as proof along with the 3rd edition


At least it did mine, and the few I have shown the results to!   I need to go get a Pizza to celebrate this discovery!!!!    Hurray!!!     

[MileHigh]

Actually son, I was resetting my EXPERIMENT  (have 3 ongoing ones that take time and have to be reset)


You know, that stuff you dont do.   

I do "do," you just read how I have lots of bench experience.

Okay so you are back.  So please prove that you are not bluffing and discuss three electrical design issues for a Bedini motor.  After all, you have built several.  Also please answer the coil-flywheel question.

Thanks,

MileHigh

[TheoriaApophasis]

Energetic Forum make comments that some medium to high-profile free energy proposition

MileHigh

I assume you arent referring to me son,.......  I make NO mention NOR claims etc etc  regarding FREE energy, or Overunity, or harvesting cow farts for powering cars.


or the other ENORMOUS plethora of free energy quackery that spins on the evil WWW.

[tinman]

@tinman

The simple fact that you are producing bubbles in water is enough to produce the spin. The bubbles when created displace the surrounding water that wants to move back into the position where is was before it was displaced. All those bubbles now move upwards and given the bubbles are round and the water has friction, any main rise direction will produce some spin that will be maintained until another spin direction becomes more prevalent. We cannot say that it is the magnetic field above the magnet that is creating the spin, but we do see the effect and we can easily misunderstand this as the magnet generating the spin on its own.

In your case there is no magnetic attraction between the bubbles and the magnet since the bubbles are not metallic or magnetic themselves. They are just caught up in the rising momentum all reaching the top and then continuing to rise out. Also, the bubbles rising up the magnet sidewall create a differential of surface stress on the magnet that adds to the momentum of spin, but again, none of that can be directly attributable to the magnetic field.

Anyways, the main question then arises as per the effects explained by @TA, and that is, in one instance the magnet is producing a vortex but in another instance the magnet is producing cones with ferrofluid. So which one is it, vortex or cones.

wattsup

Wattsup-did you watch the video?. If so,can you explain as to why we get zero spin when i use the piece of pipe that has no magnetic field,and as soon as i add a magnet to that very same piece of pipe,we get a very clear spin. Why dose the spin direction change when flipping a magnet over-the very same magnet,with the very same shape?.
The magnetic fields are needed to create the spin,there is no doubt about that.

[gravityblock]

YOU SAID:
It appears Bayles' quantum vlm rotational velocity is the same as your "dielectric inertial plane".

It looks like thats the case yes,  TOO BAD his brain fahrt  calls is a "quantum rim"

YES, and all that does is prop up what I said in the book,  that light, having a radial dielectric component will warp around the DIELECTRIC INERTIAL PLANE of the "magnet".   

In case you haven't noticed, I've been posting information to prop up your book!  I'm in agreement with you on the magnetic vortex and on the dielectric inertial plane, as you decided to refer to it.  However, I do not agree with you on your views on QM.  I understand how and why you feel the way you do about QM, but I don't agree with you on this issue.

Gravock