Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[TheoriaApophasis]

What reflects to get to the imaging device?

Youre too literal,   

  discharge 'reflectance'

[TheoriaApophasis]

Please show how classical E/M can for example explain the observations of Hertz' P/E experiments.

I said JUST the opposite, the "photoelectric effect" is governed by dielectric pulses, greater the frequency, higher the power transfer.


I never said EM was AT ALL responsible for the PE "effect" , JUST THE OPPOSITE.



All EM is exactly like a Coaxial cable, analogously.


Magnetic lines of induction cannot terminate in space nor can dielectric ones. The radial axle of the geometry of light is absolutely necessitated, it cannot exist in any other way, and certainly not the "self-conjugating and self-capacitance" conceptions as currently exist about electromagnetism. The claim that EM is "self-conjugating and inducing self-capacitance" is to claim your car engine pistons are reciprocating upon nothing, no crankshaft of mutual inductive rebounding reciprocation. This is both illogical and impossible. Countless phenomena, including the so-called "photo-electric" (really the radial-dielectric) effect proves this to be the case. As mentioned before, electricity can only induce or terminate into or as magnetism thru dielectricity.


Light, correctly, does not travel at all, rather the pistons of electrical and magnetic vortices circumambulate around the dielectric crankshaft of disturbance and radially ripple and travel the cosmos is the premise for the false observation that light travels, when in fact only divergences (electrical and magnetic) are manifest and propagate. The Z-axis radial dielectric 'core' of all light neither travels nor has empirical quantity, only its modal attributions of magnetic and electrical divergences do. Logically and necessitatively so.

From New York Times April 8, 1934 Section X, p. 9
Tesla sees evidence radio and light are sound (-like)

    *I only recently discovered this passage (post 3rd edition of this book) below from Tesla, which in conclusion, is support for my discovery that light's missing secret that it is not transverse electromagnetism, NOR could it 'self-propagating' EM; this is impossible. Light has, necessitatively, a radial dielectric component. Parenthesis are mine.

     "There is something frightening about the universe when we consider that only our senses of sound and sight make it beautiful. The universe is darker than the darkest ink, colder than the coldest ice and more silent than a silent tomb. Sight and sound are our only avenues through which we can perceive it all...there is a third sense which have failed to discover."
     "The fascination of the (false) electromagnetic theory of light, advanced by Maxwell and subsequently experimentally investigated by Hertz, was so great that even now, although controverted, the (idiot) scientific minds are under its sway. This theory supposed the existence of a medium which was solid yet permitted bodies to pass through it without resistance; (this absurdity is) tenuous behind conception, and yet according to out conceptions of mechanical principles and ages of experience, such a medium was absolutely impossible. Light was (wrongly) considered such a phenomena bound up in that kind of medium, namely transmitting transverse vibrations like a solid."
     "What then can light be if NOT a transverse vibration(s)? I consider this extremely important. Light cannot be anything but a longitudinal (Z-axis radial!) disturbance in the Ether, involving alternate compressions and rarefactions. Light can be nothing else (phenomenally so) than a sound wave in the Ether."
     "This appears clearly, if it is first realized that there is no Maxwellian Ether, therefore there can be no transverse oscillation in the medium. The Newtonian theory is in error, because it fails entirely in not being able to explain how a small candle can project (light) with the same speed at the blazing sun, which has immensely higher temperatures (and power). We have made sure by experiment that light propagates with the same velocity irrespective of the character of the source! Such consistency of velocity can only be explained by assuming that it is dependent solely on the 'physical' properties of the (Ether) medium, especially its density and its elastic (potential of) force." – Nikola Tesla



There are two ways to deliver identical amounts kinetic energy in TEM of dielectric radiation to a target, a large volume of coherent radiation as in a laser, or a small volume of incoherent radiation of a short wavelength (gamma, X-ray) comprising a center-axial with an extremely high kinetic radial energy capacitance. 

BELOW: Exactly like a power drill, the more revolutions per second, or in the case of light, the shorter the wavelength, the more power is brought to bear in the coaxial system. Drill bit, or light, same analogy, increase in power, increase in revolutions (= shorter wavelength). Draw more power to the drill to increase physical power to the bit to drill thru tougher more dense materials is the same with "electromagnetism", which is why X-rays, gamma rays etc. 'drill' right thru dense matter, transfer power and can cause immense damage. The magnetic component of traditional "electromagnetic" geometry cannot affect damage or power at shorter wavelengths, nor can its reciprocating transverse electrical component; only the coherent dielectric radial component can. The nonsense of "wave-particle duality" is dismissed and replaced with logic and rationality in the true model of dielectro-electromagnetic phenomena. In the diagram below you will need to see this along all 3 axes, Z-axis dielectric, X-axis electrical, and Y-axis magnetic. For illustration purposes the X and Y are laid flat in 2D for illustration purposes, otherwise the Y-axis magnetic would overlay the Z-axis and make the diagram unclear.   




Below: Shorter wavelength light contains higher dielectric capacitance, and likewise are more kinetic in their energy transfer. On right, shorter wavelength light is deflected more due to the rate at which the induction can occur in the medium of transmission, thru the dielectric capacitor (or 'insulator', i.e. glass etc.).

[sadang]

I can not understand why is so hard for some of you to accept the actual science is full of relative truths, of axioms, of hypothesis, of unrelated constants, of a lot of garbage concepts, just to fit in a so-called scientific model? I suppose because you never tried to understand the foundations of current scientific concepts, but blindly repeat and replicate what they are told. Just a matter of laziness and comfort. And how much energy consumed just for the sake of exacerbate vanity. False values, false development false results!

[MarkE]

I said JUST the opposite, the "photoelectric effect" is governed by dielectric pulses, greater the frequency, higher the power transfer.


I never said EM was AT ALL responsible for the PE "effect" , JUST THE OPPOSITE.



All EM is exactly like a Coaxial cable, analogously.

Unfortunately, that leaves your hypothesis unable to correctly predict the P/E effect.  No matter how unsatisfying you find QM and QED it accurately predicts the P/E effect.

Magnetic lines of induction cannot terminate in space nor can dielectric ones. The radial axle of the geometry of light is absolutely necessitated, it cannot exist in any other way, and certainly not the "self-conjugating and self-capacitance" conceptions as currently exist about electromagnetism. The claim that EM is "self-conjugating and inducing self-capacitance" is to claim your car engine pistons are reciprocating upon nothing, no crankshaft of mutual inductive rebounding reciprocation. This is both illogical and impossible. Countless phenomena, including the so-called "photo-electric" (really the radial-dielectric) effect proves this to be the case. As mentioned before, electricity can only induce or terminate into or as magnetism thru dielectricity.

Those are all nice assertions, but the problem is that you are:  A) Arguing against claims I don't make, and B) Making a series of assertions that as far as I can tell fail to address the observed photo electric effect.  Your ideas need to account for the observation that below certain frequencies we do not see any emission, and for a given material at and abovie a given frequency we see copious emission.  IE we observe emission responds in a step-wise, not linear fashion.

Light, correctly, does not travel at all, rather the pistons of electrical and magnetic vortices circumambulate around the dielectric crankshaft of disturbance and radially ripple and travel the cosmos is the premise for the false observation that light travels, when in fact only divergences (electrical and magnetic) are manifest and propagate. The Z-axis radial dielectric 'core' of all light neither travels nor has empirical quantity, only its modal attributions of magnetic and electrical divergences do. Logically and necessitatively so.

This is more assertion.  Where are the experiments that establish "pistons of electrical and magnetic vortices"? Likewise where are the experiments that establish such "pistons" "circumambulate", or any of the other colorful assertions here?

From New York Times April 8, 1934 Section X, p. 9
Tesla sees evidence radio and light are sound (-like)

    *I only recently discovered this passage (post 3rd edition of this book) below from Tesla, which in conclusion, is support for my discovery that light's missing secret that it is not transverse electromagnetism, NOR could it 'self-propagating' EM; this is impossible. Light has, necessitatively, a radial dielectric component. Parenthesis are mine.

First, Maxwell's equations establish conditions under which two orthogonal fields can propagate without a transmission media.  So, at least from a mathematical perspective the claim that transverse propagation without media is impossible has been disproven for over 150 years now.  You may wish to put forward the argument that E/M radiation is not an example of such a phenomenon: that it actually does require a media:  IE the lumineferous aether.  But to do so successfully, you have a lot to overcome.  You would for example need to be able to explain why it is working from Maxwell's equations that we can accurately solve wave propagation in many different and complex media with very accurate measurement correlation from DC to THz.

     "There is something frightening about the universe when we consider that only our senses of sound and sight make it beautiful. The universe is darker than the darkest ink, colder than the coldest ice and more silent than a silent tomb. Sight and sound are our only avenues through which we can perceive it all...there is a third sense which have failed to discover."
     "The fascination of the (false) electromagnetic theory of light, advanced by Maxwell and subsequently experimentally investigated by Hertz, was so great that even now, although controverted, the (idiot) scientific minds are under its sway. This theory supposed the existence of a medium which was solid yet permitted bodies to pass through it without resistance; (this absurdity is) tenuous behind conception, and yet according to out conceptions of mechanical principles and ages of experience, such a medium was absolutely impossible. Light was (wrongly) considered such a phenomena bound up in that kind of medium, namely transmitting transverse vibrations like a solid."
     "What then can light be if NOT a transverse vibration(s)? I consider this extremely important. Light cannot be anything but a longitudinal (Z-axis radial!) disturbance in the Ether, involving alternate compressions and rarefactions. Light can be nothing else (phenomenally so) than a sound wave in the Ether."

The problem here is that we have lots of experiments that show transverse behavior in the far field, not longitudal.

     "This appears clearly, if it is first realized that there is no Maxwellian Ether, therefore there can be no transverse oscillation in the medium. The Newtonian theory is in error, because it fails entirely in not being able to explain how a small candle can project (light) with the same speed at the blazing sun, which has immensely higher temperatures (and power). We have made sure by experiment that light propagates with the same velocity irrespective of the character of the source! Such consistency of velocity can only be explained by assuming that it is dependent solely on the 'physical' properties of the (Ether) medium, especially its density and its elastic (potential of) force." – Nikola Tesla

Maxwell's equations allow for self-supporting propagation of two orthogonal fields that oscillate transverse to the direction of propagation, provided the propagation velocity is the right value.  Low and behold measurements of the speed of light in a vacuum come out to that value.  The "Hertzian waves" that Tesla so vehemently objected to correctly predict behaviors over frequency ranges and to accuracies that Tesla could have only dreamed about in his day.  While Tesla stands out as one of the great engineers of the modern era, he was a genius engineer.  He was not a scientist.

There are two ways to deliver identical amounts kinetic energy in TEM of dielectric radiation to a target, a large volume of coherent radiation as in a laser, or a small volume of incoherent radiation of a short wavelength (gamma, X-ray) comprising a center-axial with an extremely high kinetic radial energy capacitance. 

This is something you assert.  Can you show reasonable proof that these assertions are true?

BELOW: Exactly like a power drill, the more revolutions per second, or in the case of light, the shorter the wavelength, the more power is brought to bear in the coaxial system. Drill bit, or light, same analogy, increase in power, increase in revolutions (= shorter wavelength). Draw more power to the drill to increase physical power to the bit to drill thru tougher more dense materials is the same with "electromagnetism", which is why X-rays, gamma rays etc. 'drill' right thru dense matter, transfer power and can cause immense damage. The magnetic component of traditional "electromagnetic" geometry cannot affect damage or power at shorter wavelengths, nor can its reciprocating transverse electrical component; only the coherent dielectric radial component can. The nonsense of "wave-particle duality" is dismissed and replaced with logic and rationality in the true model of dielectro-electromagnetic phenomena. In the diagram below you will need to see this along all 3 axes, Z-axis dielectric, X-axis electrical, and Y-axis magnetic. For illustration purposes the X and Y are laid flat in 2D for illustration purposes, otherwise the Y-axis magnetic would overlay the Z-axis and make the diagram unclear.

Well a problem I see right off hand with those assertions is that different materials exhibit resonances at different frequencies.  So while power goes up with frequency, we see absorption responses that are very non-linear with frequency near the material resonance.  That's rather convenient, because it makes microwave ovens possible.  There is today a company that is trying to leverage the resonant frequency of oxygen molecules in very high speed connectors.

Below: Shorter wavelength light contains higher dielectric capacitance, and likewise are more kinetic in their energy transfer. On right, shorter wavelength light is deflected more due to the rate at which the induction can occur in the medium of transmission, thru the dielectric capacitor (or 'insulator', i.e. glass etc.).

Terms like "higher dielectric capacitance" will have to be defined.  In the world I live in: capacitance is the permittivity of a dielectric divided by thickness of the dielectric integrated over the area of the dielectric.  Where I come from:  E/M waves slow down as they travel through dielectrics with greater permittivities.  So if you would please be so kind:  Tell me what "dielectric capacitance" is that it can be a property of E/M energy, and not of the media that E/M energy passes through.

[TheoriaApophasis]

No matter how unsatisfying you find QM and QED it accurately predicts the P/E effect.

Nice fucking claim,  it does NO such thing, NOR is there any proof of same.

QM has never defined a FIELD..........NEVER

QM is based upon non-existant "virtual particles" for which there is ZERO fucking evidence.


So, dead wrong 100 fucking %

Likewise where are the experiments that establish such "pistons" "circumambulate", or any of the other colorful assertions here?

Try reading Oliver Heaviside,   however Id be shocked if you even knew who he was. 

Low and behold measurements of the speed of light in a vacuum come out to that value.

Low and behold, youre full of shit. 

"The electric field can only 'soak into the medium' at the rate defined by that medium.
Light can only travel at luminal velocity as defined by the dielectric medium and its dimensional relation of one over c square, a
numeric constant. Light is not a material projection, it is an inductive process, a process of the Ether".


Light is only a limit to transverse EM, its not a max, NOR is it fixed,  the speed of change depends on the medium of transmission.

You, are both unwise and unstudied.

Terms like "higher dielectric capacitance" will have to be defined

Stick a copper rod in your dick, and lay down on TOP of a hill in a LIGHTNING STORM...

report back to us as to the "Definition" of same. 

In the world I live in: capacitance is the permittivity of a dielectric divided by thickness of the dielectric integrated over the area of the dielectric.

In the delusional world you live in,..... there is 0 comprehension of magnetic permeability

Harf harf harf 

Tell me what "dielectric capacitance" is that it can be a property of E/M energy

I See you have a sick brain fart in tying dielectrics/electrostatics WITH and DIRECTLY-TO  electromagnetism

I see your sickness, .......suggest you correct it at your discretion.