Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[TheoriaApophasis]

Here is the Flicker photos of Michael Snyder he developed the single axis magnet plasmon viewer..  His YT channel is https://www.youtube.com/user/SirZerp/videos

Acca..

Yes, I know about his youtube channel.  The work of his, etc.......Great work on his part.
Lovely pics,.......(actually thats the name of his book too as I recall, pretty pictures) 



You see that SPHERE in the center (BELOW), thats the dielectric super-point.

Its just 1 of 1000 ways of telling people (if they believe you or not) that dielectricity terminates (in enormous power) into the creation of mass.


Mass/matter is "MADE SPATIAL" by (obviously) the inter-atomic magnetism. 

but its field (LIKE dielectricity) is counterspatial, is Omni-directionally centripetal.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Does not the area of the "centripetal" expand outward as distance from the pole face increases?

Yes, same as a natural tornado does.   Centripetal is MAX velocity at its APEX (point)

Opposite of the Centrifugal.......MAX velocity is at the CONE END, of which, IN A MAGNET (as mentioned in the book)  is at the EDGE POINT of either "end" of a "magnet"

And WHY is that the MAX point of centrifugal on a magnet??   Because thats where the physical "magnet" 'ENDS', and where dielectric acceleration END.....after that all reciprocation is driven spatially by the interlacing fields (or in intermediate centrifugal, doesnt make it "over the fence" and returns at the inertial plane)

That is, should not increasing the distance between the pole face and the viewer cause the view of the 'centripetal" area expand?

Yes, but at distance you are seeing only the mutual interlacing of BOTH With a more loose, but identical hypotrochoid shape ,  and you are seeing the same AT the centripetal, they are all point-nonspecific self-similar (thats incommensurate field reciprocation).

except in the case of a ring magnet where the centripetal is geometrically dilated as necessitated by the field geometry;..... the SAME but SPATIALLY divergent as a ring, therefore magnifying the spatially CONVERGENT (counterspatial moving) centripetal.

And again, how do you justify using magnetic particles to view the fields, when they are merely smaller analogs of more macroscopic iron filings?

I dont, I say EXACTLY THAT IN THE BOOK........which is why I use MANY diff testing materials, graphite, bismuth dust,  special suspensions, and a few other things I will talk about in the future edition, but will not mention here and now.

I have several NON charged, NON ferrous testing methods.



You can test with paramagnetic AND diamagnetic materials with magnets, you just have to "get creative" and think  outside of the box.

[picowatt]

TA,

Personally, I have always believed that regardless of whether magnetic, paramagnetic, diamagnetic, or even miniature hall sensors are used in an attempt to map the field pattern, the very act of inserting these items into the field modifies the field.

Although the effect can likely be reduced to some degree with, as you say, a diamagnetic material, doing so requires the particle size to be very small and the medium they are contained within to be of very low viscosity to allow adequate mobility of the very small particles in concert with the weak effect on them produced by the field.  But that increased mobility also allows neighboring particles to as well be more easily influenced by any changes to the field produced by adjacent particles.

In any case, as was mentioned several posts back, do you believe these observed lines and patterns of vortices created via the "centrifugal" and "centripetal" fields to be stationary?  That is, in your drawings with inward/outward indicating arrows, are these merely static vectors indicating field direction with strength varying over distance or is there an actual component of motion, flow, or oscillation related to these proposed field vectors?

PW

[TheoriaApophasis]

TA,
Personally, I have always believed that regardless of whether magnetic, paramagnetic, diamagnetic, or even miniature hall sensors are used in an attempt to map the field pattern, the very act of inserting these items into the field modifies the field.

Fields influence fields, there is no argument, however you really need to see the picture below.....and realize this END ON view of  AC TRANSMISSION LINES is nearly 100% same as a permanent magnet

only difference is some spread because you have TWO WIRES rather than a super-binding sphere/cylinder etc etc "physical magnet"

Its only due to immense study of Platonic incommensurability I have a firm grip inverse moving conjugate fields in a binding magneto-dielectric geometry.
Its also a wholly LOST ART of thinking methodology called retroduction.

In any case, as was mentioned several posts back, do you believe these observed lines and patterns of vortices created via the "centrifugal" and "centripetal" fields to be stationary?  That is, in your drawings with inward/outward indicating arrows, are these merely static vectors indicating field direction with strength varying over distance or is there an actual component of motion or oscillation related to these proposed field vectors?
PW

Depends on what you are connotating (or denotating) as  " STATIONARY "..... = equalization / equilibrium

Or "moving IN perfect equalibrium"

movement is an extrapolation of space AND time (>>>>>and therefore a resultant modality of a radiative field<<<<<<).........    Spacetime is a posterior attribute TO and OF radiative fields.....


This is where Einstein turned into a mental midget, he reified the attribute (space) as THAT which "does stuff"     

Chicken AND (NOT OR!!) Egg  situation   

all movement is forcing fields against fields and getting = Induction, electrification, force etc etc etc.

[TheoriaApophasis]

(pictured below) The "magnets" dielectric inertial plane , ...the very principle "driving" the entire "magnet" (= dielectric electrified object in dis-equilibrium)


The radiation / discharge OF dielectricity IS magnetism

Co-eternal / co-principles of the single Ether-fulcrum,   charge/inertia/dielectric .....and....... radiation/discharge(=magnetism)

The Ether is the Ether is the Ether.


This is why JC Maxwell called magnetism the  "dielectric field"