Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[TheoriaApophasis]

Here's a visually stimulating image of the big magnet we live on that clearly shows the accretion disc.

Map of all the tropical cyclones from 1985-2005, courtesy  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Global_tropical_cyclone_tracks-edit2.jpg

Excellent job..........I have an experiment I keep working on that shows the dielectric inertial plane creates "cyclones" along the 'equator' of the  magnet as well.

However I cannot post pics of this device or experiment (yet),.......but I assure you, yes, it is there

it goes round in waves and undulations and creates, from time to time interesting (what on earth would be) cyclones from the dielectric inertial plane (as you so-called it, the dielectric accretion disk)


So tired, been resetting experiments for days,  only few hours sleep for past few days.

thumbs up.

[TheoriaApophasis]

To: TheoriaApophasis 


Here below is the thread by Mark Snoswell, he was posting seven years ago on magnet vortex spin, I know that you will like this... Now Mark is the chief technology officer at http://www.chavaenergy.com/

Dr. Mark Snoswell, Chief Technology Officer: Dr. Mark Snoswell graduated from Adelaide University with an Honours degree in Biochemistry in late 70s. Mark has a diverse career since then including: PhD in Biotechnology/Biochemistry; CTO of Torson Inc – a global sports biomechanics and edutainment company; Founder and Chairman of Ballistic Media – a global corporation that includes BallsiticPublishing.com and the CGSociety.org; Mark is also the President of the CGSociety. More recently Mark has been developing breakthrough concepts for how our universe works and new devices to generate clean and abundant power using solid state electromagnetic systems.


http://www.overunity.com/2764/spinor-resonance-explanation-for-tpu-like-devices/#.U9EyaKyLN8U



Here are may old clips, looks like we are on the same track...

Thanks for the book !!! Now the was allot of effort !! Don't let the ass*oles get you distracted ....



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1TnGGeeP0I&list=UUKp4xN6pwIVRqiKhtdc_Wsw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXifaqdbLhs&index=37&list=UUKp4xN6pwIVRqiKhtdc_Wsw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR7c4iXum-A


Ps..

"MileHigh you don't exist  !!! your words a worthless even with some 3000 posts !!"

Don't respond....!!

thanks for the links, Iemmie take some peeks and see.........  Well, the book isnt done , it has twice (or more) to add to it, new experiments, and some amazing stuff that even shocked me.


thumbs up

[picowatt]

Here is the view of ONLY THE CENTRIPETAL (center point ONLY) vortex as filmed thru a pair of optical glass with micron thin FERROFLUID in between , and ringed by LED lights

however even using 2 lights, you can see the same thing


THIS IS CENTRIPETAL IMAGE ONLY pictured below,   NO CENTRIFUGAL IS SHOWN


THEN, I show you BOTH, with a bit of the ringed centriFUGAL  around the centripetal




THEN,  pictured below  BASED UPON MY CALCULATIONS (before seeing these REAL FIELD (not created) IMAGES), IS MY PREDICTION OF THEIR APPEARANCE,......WHICH IS 100% IDENTICAL

How does one infer spin "direction" from the apparently symmetrical patterns portrayed in the images posted?

As I agree with your comments regarding the fallacies of using iron filings to determine field patterns/shapes due to the multitude of individual magnets thereby created and thereto aligned, this would also seem true for any iron filings or magnetic material regardless how small those filings or materials are milled and suspended.  The interactions may take on finer detail as particle size decreases producing more intricate patterns, but are they not, in the end, merely a higher resolution pattern with the same fallacies of the more macroscopic iron filings?

(Please, the use of bold and caps is not necessary.  To the contrary, most consider it as shouting, which is uncalled for.)

PW

[picowatt]

Here is the view of ONLY THE CENTRIPETAL (center point ONLY) vortex as filmed thru a pair of optical glass with micron thin FERROFLUID in between , and ringed by LED lights

however even using 2 lights, you can see the same thing


THIS IS CENTRIPETAL IMAGE ONLY pictured below,   NO CENTRIFUGAL IS SHOWN


THEN, I show you BOTH, with a bit of the ringed centriFUGAL  around the centripetal




THEN,  pictured below [as found in the book] BASED UPON MY CALCULATIONS (before seeing these REAL FIELD (not created) IMAGES), IS MY PREDICTION OF THEIR APPEARANCE,......WHICH IS 100% IDENTICAL

TA,

In screenshot 1825, is this an end on view of a magnetic pole?  Can you indicate where the extents of the physical dimensions of the magnet used are located behind the glass/pattern?  I.e., if this is an end on view of a cylindrical magnet pole, where does the OD of the magnet end in relation to, say, the circularly defined center pattern?

PW

[TheoriaApophasis]

TA,

In screenshot 1825, is this an end on view of a magnetic pole?  Can you indicate where the extents of the physical dimensions of the magnet used are located behind the glass/pattern?  I.e., if this is an end on view of a cylindrical magnet pole, where does the OD of the magnet end in relation to, say, the circularly defined center pattern?

PW

YES, it is a zoomed in image of ONLY the centripetal vortex (however even the very center is still influenced by centrifugal inductive force which still necessitates (only much tighter) this geometry    (until in reaches inside at the midpoint of reintegration).


Its a "dilated" view of the centripetal,  using a RING magnet............So you can see a MUCH BIGGER view of the centripetal of a SOLID disk magnet,  BY HOW.       Simple.........Ring magnet.

its the same AS a disk magnet , only magnified so you can see it better.

Disk magnet you can barely barely see it, because its so small and tight.




regardless however, the centrifugal (see BOTTOM PIC) on a CUBE (1/4") magnet is the same   ......black is the face of the magnet

far AWAY from the viewer, and this tiny cube magnet......you can see the centrifugal only (of course, as it should be)