The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity

[rangerover444]

 IotaYodi,


I’m not that familiar with the string theory, though you may be mixing dipole
and monopoles terms.  Dipole is a particle that have N pole on one end and S pole
on the other end. That’s what mainstream consider to be the case.  Ed L. on the
other hand is talking about N pole individual magnets and S pole individual magnets.
These are particles that are one pole, or Monopoles of you will. If I’m not wrong
he suggest that they are Elongated (though he never mentioned that). But they
posses only one pole.

Maxwell was the first to dismiss their existence and that’s what is accepted today.
In my opinion Maxwell did not apply the right tests in order to make this discovery,
even though he tried to find them. In general, repeating Maxwell experiments (and his
fellow researchers) in physics classes, is repeating on the same mistake they made,
Therefore if someone want to make this discovery they should try different tests,
based on a “blank previous knowledge”


Cheers.

[IotaYodi]

Dipole is a particle that have N pole on one end and S pole
on the other end.

The string theory is still a dipole (as far as they show) but not a particle.
Eds basic drawing is still really a dipole with a neutral up the center. He shows the positive and negative separated. Whether either can exist without the neutral I dont know. If they could then they could become monopoles.
Heres the distressing part for me. Both Stubblefield and Ed L. Died with their secrets mostly unsolved. It really shouldnt have been that way. Neither one could hold a candle to Tesla though. What an amazing mind.

[Mk1]

@all

I love Ed !

********One must see book ... http://www.scribd.com/doc/34317/Spintronics-The-Secret-World-of-Magnets-2006-by-Howard-Johnson ****************

[rangerover444]

 IotaYodi,

Thanks again for your thoughts,
The drawing you are showing had never being commented on by Ed about
it’s meaning. It appears on the front cover of ‘Magnetic Currents’ booklet
and so far got hundreds of different interpretations by the public.
On the other hand he clearly stated and showed through his tests that we are
dealing with monopoles that are acting together.

I’m not familiar with Stubblefield, but I would not expect Ed to hold a candle
to Tesla. No doubt that Tesla was a genius which acted upon his understanding
with a great courage. But he also had some problems. First, he was “addicted
to technology and applications”, which is ok but not when you study nature.
Second, he never found what where the building block of matter and waves.
Third, his arrogance and craving for attention led him “by his nose” and as a
scientists, you can’t afford that….. And lastly, he did not start from the beginning
(from the building blocks and up), which is a common mistakes these days and
back then.

You see, Einstein was a genius also, but since he “had to work with the knowledge
he inherited by others”, there was no way he could do his job…… Therefore
his is only way to push the envelope was through “theoretical science”….

There is a distinct difference between “Technology Science” and “Understanding
Nature”. The first one gives you the illusion of power, mastering nature, achievements,
and put you in orbit around “Human Needs”. In the second one you being led by
Nature, you are not in the lead anymore, and your head is not guided by applications….
but by natural laws and your own curiosity…..   Sound somewhat lyric, but no wonder
nature opened only a narrow crack for human to glimpse, and no wonder Ed took
his secrets with him to the grave…  This trade, has already gone, or to be exact was
missed in the 18xx, then turned to be “Interrogating Nature to reveal it’s secrets”,
but nature will not give them away so easy….

Cheers.