Gyroscopic effect

[sparks]

@libra_spirit

       The valence electrons of a good conductor are barely bound to the neucleus. They form an electronic cloud with valence electrons meandering between atoms. There are no defined valence orbitals as the valence shell is in a constant state of flux.  Energy can travel through this electronic cloud in a number of ways.  It can be radiated and take on the form of an emwave, it can be a compressive wave like sound energy,  or it can be mass flow like wind.  The electronic valence shell configuration is more a construct of external forces than the typical protonic construct.  Electrons have mass just like every other form of matter.   So why wouldn't their vectored kinetic energy give rise to inertia and the gyroscopic effect.  Heating of a conductor arises from a number of influences.  The most obvious is the potential energy being converted to kinetic energy in the electrons who find themselves in the sub-valence shells.
           Do electron's really flow in a vacuum tube?  I see it more as a potential energy wave.  Once the wave strikes the collector of the tube it is converted into light energy if it is a picture tube or emf if it is say a rectifier tube.  Even if there is an electron flow it is no where near the mass flow in the tpu. You can have the power of a bullet equal to the power of a merry go round at full tilt.

[libra_spirit]

"The valence electrons of a good conductor are barely bound to the neucleus. They form an electronic cloud with valence electrons meandering between atoms. There are no defined valence orbitals as the valence shell is in a constant state of flux.  Energy can travel through this electronic cloud in a number of ways.  It can be radiated and take on the form of an emwave,"

This is a light velocity wave, and travels best along the wire surface where it meets a different density material. The transverse wave.

"it can be a compressive wave like sound energy," 

This is the longitudinal wave, tesla wave, and expressed in the pancake coils

"or it can be mass flow like wind." 

This is electric current and gives rise to the resistance of the wire to drop voltage or burn up power.
This resistance is measured for each conductor based on its wire diameter or cross sectional area.

"The electronic valence shell configuration is more a construct of external forces than the typical protonic construct." 

Then external forces hold atoms together? Keep the electrons in orbits around the nucleus at very specific distances? From where does the positive charge originate for all electric fields?

"Electrons have mass just like every other form of matter.   So why wouldn't their vectored kinetic energy give rise to inertia and the gyroscopic effect." 

It does for sure. at 1800 times lower then the nucleus of the atom. Plus it spins in only one plane of motion compared to the nucleus which has spin involving multiple planes of motion. Any diamagnetic fields will seek the greatest distance from both poles of magnetic fields, this creates spin in multiple planes, and anchors the nucleus from wanting to turn quickly. Magnetic field in electron shell can rotate it's poles at microwave frequency with little or no centrifugal forces produced.

"Heating of a conductor arises from a number of influences.  The most obvious is the potential energy being converted to kinetic energy in the electrons who find themselves in the sub-valence shells.
Do electron's really flow in a vacuum tube?" 

Then the electron beam in a TV set is photons? We all know photons cannot be steered by magnetic fields. The deflection yoke could not steer photons to scan the beam through the raster. Whatever is in the vacuum tubes is responding to magnetic field.

"I see it more as a potential energy wave.  Once the wave strikes the collector of the tube it is converted into light energy if it is a picture tube or emf if it is say a rectifier tube."

If this were true vacuum tubes would radiate EM waves and loose energy like antennas. The only way to focus them in a CRT would be a directional beam antenna.

"Even if there is an electron flow it is no where near the mass flow in the tpu. You can have the power of a bullet equal to the power of a merry go round at full tilt."

Electrons are in a spin state already at .999999995 c while inside the atoms, they are already spinning with this centrifugal force as little merrygo rounds. While manipulating this spin face does have a little effect, I agree it cannot explain the TPU "feeling" like a gyro, unless their is a nuclear interaction of some kind happening.

Dave L

[sparks]

  @libra_spirit

       Copper a conductor has an amorphous molecular bond.  The bond angles aren't dictated by the proton neutron structure of the neucleus at all.  This leads me to believe that the bonding valence electron orbitals are not protonically dictated either.  The sub valence shell electrons are dealing with the protonic charge quite well.  Therefore you don't have to rip the electron out of a protonically dictated orbital to have an electrical current in a conductor.   Electron orbitals are not solely dictated by the protonic charge and it's position in the neucleus.  There are em exchanges  between the neucleus and the electrons which allow for electrons to exist at differing distances from the neucleus at different orbital speeds spins mass and size.  In other words not all electrons are created equally.   
      I alway thought a crt has vertical and horizontal deflector plates. What would stop controlling an em wave from being influenced by  magnetic or electric field manipulation.
    In the end it is probably vibratory inertia from the windings jumping around way or a combination of both.    Still think there is a high amperage dc current  limited only by the collector valence electrons in an orbital current inside the tpu collector winding.  Lots of electrons going fast in a circle.  Inertia enough to be experienced ?

[libra_spirit]

"Copper a conductor has an amorphous molecular bond.  The bond angles aren't dictated by the proton neutron structure of the neucleus at all.  This leads me to believe that the bonding valence electron orbitals are not protonically dictated either.  The sub valence shell electrons are dealing with the protonic charge quite well." 

The angles of the electron shell are dictated by the prevailant magnetic field, as are the proton shell. They will both allways right their spin to meet the magnetic field and then preccess around it. As in, they both seek to spin in alignment with the same magnetic field. The electron shell recovers at microwave velocity, and the proton shell recovers at mhz rates of turn for their independent magnetic fields. The electrons personal magnetic field is always aligned with the orbitals magnetic field. It is the poles of the magnetic fields that are manipulated, but during a turn of the field both spin against one another and try to spread out their spin planes and tilt their axis of spin away from one another.

"Therefore you don't have to rip the electron out of a protonically dictated orbital to have an electrical current in a conductor.   Electron orbitals are not solely dictated by the protonic charge and it's position in the neucleus.  There are em exchanges  between the neucleus and the electrons which allow for electrons to exist at differing distances from the neucleus at different orbital speeds spins mass and size.  In other words not all electrons are created equally."

An electron floats and spins at a constant distance from the nuclear mass because as it pulls away it meets a force pulling it back, and as it gets sucked in by positive charged nucleus it is also pushed back away by diamagnetic field. This is the diamagnetic effect at specific distances. All force outside the nuclear mass is EM. Within the mass the strong force is added to the mix and bonds the ptotons to the neutrons tightly.

The diamagnetic force I believe is located in the neutrons, however this is only a guess. It would have to be reactive and sense the strength of the electrons coupling with it.
 
"I alway thought a crt has vertical and horizontal deflector plates. What would stop controlling an em wave from being influenced by  magnetic or electric field manipulation."

An RF wave as leaves an antenna is photons, and as light they are not effected in direction of propagation by magnetic fields no more then a flashlight beam is. The deflection coils are magnets, and deflect an electron beam because the electron beam has a magnetic field. You could not shoot this out of an antenna short of lightning. In a small spark gap on a tesla coil magnets are used to steer and control the sparks properties. An electric arc shooting into a magnet will allways strike the edge of one pole it will never hit the end of the magnet. A radio wave will pass through without being bent at all.

"In the end it is probably vibratory inertia from the windings jumping around way or a combination of both.    Still think there is a high amperage dc current  limited only by the collector valence electrons in an orbital current inside the tpu collector winding.  Lots of electrons going fast in a circle.  Inertia enough to be experienced ?

This could very well be, I would love to know how to set up these conditions to get electrons this free to move this fast in copper medium! Without burning up the copper. This is the $64,000 question. Its good to shoot these scenerios around, and try to see from all sides on these models.

Consider also the electrons you would have flying around in coils at 90 degrees to one another may be the key to generating a mass field in itself. If this is the case then the electrons interacting in two planes of spin may be the actual force being harnessed, and the wires become superconductors in this mode of operation. I have often wondered if you could tilt all the electron spin one direction and then flow current through the wires without upsetting there magnetic alignment, is there an alignment to produce this superconductor effect?

But what would this do to the lightbulb?

Thanks,
Dave L

[sparks]

libra_spirit

"An electric arc shooting into a magnet will allways strike the edge of one pole it will never hit the end of the magnet. A radio wave will pass through without being bent at all."

   This is interesting because the transverse em wave acts as all potential emf yet it radiates.  So it's radiation must be driven by a force that is  neither electrical or magnetic or gravitational.  It is not a rolling magnetic electrical construct  which I was taught it to be.  I postulate that the potential energy is radiated through the Universe due to anti-gravity or what I call dispersion force. 

         The crt is just an electron gun and the electrons are just dipolar electro-magnetic constructs.  So the electrical potential across the tube  causes the electron kinetic response, the ray of electrons is created by magnetic concentration of the emitted electrons and the ray is swept up and down back and forth via electric fields of the plates in the tube, while the amount of electrons emitted is controlled by the grid potential causing intensity changes in the ray.  This ray strikes a coating of matter that changes the electron kinetic energy into light emission.  And the light energy radiates into the room because it is dispersed via electromagnetic wave propogation which is dispersion force at work again.  How does the emitter of the tube feel the potential of the screen.  I believe this is called a positive charge.  I believe a positive charge arises from the second force of the Universe called gravity.  The protons positive charge arises from a fundamental force to concentrate or collect.  Energy is dictated by the relation of these two forces.  Matter a state of equilibrium of these two forces.