Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[CycleGuy]

That is close to the conditions of a black hole event horizon ! Its still not a magnetic vortex as you have to have a super conduction environment and a million volts !

The extreme cold of the superconductor allowed researchers to slow events down enough that they could see them in real time. The million volts was for the electron microscope. It required that high of a voltage to get the resolution necessary to view things that small.

This vortex is there for un natural and only exists as a movement in a slow vortex mode ! Its not a real vortex.

That's magnetism you're seeing in the video above. Magnetism mediated such that it's slowed down enough that we can watch it, but magnetism just the same.

But it is very interesting ! A real vortex will suck in all the surrounding heat just like a tornado and will grow and I don't see what is presented growing !

Have you ever known a magnet to "suck in all the surrounding heat just like a tornado"? I've already provided you the mathematical proofs that the virtual photon flux of the magnetic field is spiraling through time, just ahead and just behind our own time frame, which is why we can't perceive it unless we slow it down tremendously, I'm sure you and your colleagues can follow that math. I've also provided you the groundbreaking research of Dr. Akira Tonomura showing magnetic vortexes in real time... if you're not convinced by the mathematical proofs and your own eyes, nothing will convince you. I wish you luck with your religious belief that magnets aren't vortexual in nature.

If you feed it more magnetism and it grew and the environment was cooler than its a magnetic vortex ! What you are seeing is a simple vacuum that has a tiny amount of motion and is no different than a vacuum cleaner at a million volts .. Gravity will pull entropy towards the ground in a vacuum and there is no connection here to entropy ! Neo magnets do get a little bit of heat from particles being sucked in as from the vacuum of the magnet and they will dump the static charged on its surface. A real magnetic vortex must act like a vortex in order to be one ! I can levitate  a car with enough energy but it would be wrong to say that the car can fly . If I place a super large NEO magnetic under a cloud it will not affect the cloud unless the cloud was to release a bolt of lighting onto the magnet !   

It's quite apparent you either didn't watch the videos, or didn't comprehend them. The million volts has nothing to do with the magnetic vortexes, it was used in the electron microscope to view the vortexes.

They are looking for ways to affect gravity with magnets and sometimes you can stimulate lift but it is not affecting gravity ! Don't believe all the hype . Its impossible to release the field of a magnet from the magnet just like you can not release the magnetic field from a black hole and the only natural magnetic vortex this is possible to achieve is a super large electron but that would require trillions and trillions of other electrons to merge together as a one field . To do that you need a super nova event ! They are really stuck as to gravity and how to off set it and should look towards Hutchison and the ghost field and forget high voltage in a magnetic field .

Hutchison? You mean the guy who couldn't replicate his results when asked to, whose equipment "disappeared", supposed confiscated by the Canadian authorities (and how convenient for Hutchison, since he can't be asked to replicate his results anymore), who got caught faking some of the results, who went more than a little off the rails and now spends his time making videos dressed up as a woman and calling himself Karla Kniption?

But they have money to burn and need to claim something for there work and I don't blame them for that but when they seek out claims that bend the rules of good science one must than question the motive before the finite results . So to make a real magnetic vortex it has to be independent from its magnet and grow with entropy ! This is impossible ! Fields do not move as they have no mass !

Are you sure you understand what entropy is? Nothing "grows" with entropy except the QVZPE field, which is the universal "pool" of entropied energy.

You were right in the first suggestion that a magnetic filed is a kind of warped fabric but I do not see that it is the same fabric of space time. I would strongly suggest to consider other dimensions where the polarised charge of the magnetic field is stored. A curtain can be pulled apart but if its to be held back than it must have something to hold its self to.

But this is my view and it comes from an experience of observing dimensional interactions using magnetic fields with mirrors ! The holographic events of magnetism and light need to many other imposing forms to affect it like crystals or voltage and to be honest photons do have spin and that to can be adjusted or refracted. So only a very large mass can affect photons in a pure state not a magnet !

You're saying that magnetic fields (denoted by physics as virtual photons) do not move (rotate) because they have no mass, but photons do. You seem confused.

To many go for the spectacular out of science events as to gain attention ! But the cosmological principle defeats it ever time ! We can never re invent space time as it is what it is and to challenge it is pointless. I have witnessed objects move on there own and even beings stepping into our dimension  from a mirror than become a solid energy. There was no million volts or magnets involved ! I do not trust any physics beyond the cosmological principle or would ever disrespect the masters that produced it.

I will look again and much deeper into what you have presented but at this point there is no magnetic vortex ! ....     

So you've stacked your unsubstantiated claim up against mathematical proofs and a video showing magnetic vortexes and the scientific reputation of Dr. Akira Tonomura (the first man to experimentally confirm the Aharanov-Bohm Effect and the man who developed the electron holography scanning microscope) and against the best and brightest of Quantum Mechanics.

Ok. Where's your proof of your assertions?

[minnie]

   Happy days down on the farm!

[CycleGuy]

I have a Hutchison coil and I would not let anyone see it in action ! And you see to fall for this crap about the japan claim on magnetic vortex yet you throw aside A1 who presented the correct magnetic vortex as a simple electron ... The 1 M V microscope IS A VERY HIGH TECH BIT OF KIT but sorry no magnetic vortexes there just movements of static charged air bubbles .

"static charged air bubbles"

Micron-sized air bubbles? I guess you forgot about the first video, at time 42:24, right? That's a side shot of a magnetic vortex. Not an air bubble.

How about time 44:00? Two magnetic vortexes of opposing magnetic polarities meeting and mutually annihilating. Not an air bubble.

[joel321]

Hehehehe cycleguy, element93rd is mostly a toy to play with. After playing with such toy you either throw it in the trash or invent a new toy heheheh

[iorrus]

CycleGuy.

QVZPE field: Does it exist? Prove it. I understand what it is conceptually.

Canted magnetic domains? Proof or explanation?

Relatively weak magnetic material cannot withstand the internal magnetic stresses due to cutting? Proof?

How is magnetic diffusion rate? Any experimental evidence for this? I know you mentioned Maxwell calculated it

The virtual photon flux stressing the QVZPE field and thus space-time? Proof?

Bushman magnet drop: I'd guess TA would explain this as the magnet creating force and motion. So I don't see that as clear cut evidence.

electrons in orbit about their nucleus emit Larmor radiation in the form of virtual photons? Evidence for this? Or simply an explanation? What is a virtual photon? Pretty much this entire paragrpah can be explained by TA using different ideas. Ie energy from one pole has to balance that from the other pole. He uses field pressure mediation you use virtual photons.

"Individual magnetic 'charges'? I read the nature paper they didn't really do that. They used an equation the Onsager euqtion that is used to measure macro level dissociation and divided it by constant to get the charge.

I agree that TA needs to explain nuclear decay.

I find your tone very annoying frankly. TA has presented a reasonably coherent explanation with many detailed pics and videos. You have simply regurgitated physics orthodoxy without significantly countering any of his ideas. I actually find TAs theory to be reasonably self consistent and intuitive unlike the modern physics version which is bandaged together in large part. It's like a person speaking French and person speaking English. Apple no it's pomme, no apple! no pomme!