Free Solid State/mechanical energy

[Maximumgravity1]

Well, while I was typing this, I see everyone was posting - so I am going to throw it out anyway - maybe it will help clarify something for someone:

My take of a few things here.  I think the key element is the text info posted in the picture. 

Positive charge (this is about fields not charges!) moves centripetally adding substance, increasing its charge, and density.  Centripetal motion gives birth to centrifugal motion, negative discharge moves centrifugally!  As the field moves forward it SEEMINGLY separates into two forces, the one moving through the other in a screw like fashion!  In this figure positive charge dominates negative discharge.  This is the nature of EMF!  What we have up until this point called magnetism, or the magnetic field surrounding a current carrying conductor is in reality the second component of electricity!  This diagram demonstrates the power of implosion, the compressing, condensing power of electricity!

Regarding Barbosi's question:

Is about the word association, "Positive Charge"... why not "Negative Charge"? I know must be a reason for that, Someone chose these words for a good reaon.

Here is my take - could be wrong, but I think this is beginning to help me see things properly. 

Quote
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. 
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."

Positive charge, verses negative DIScharge.  Erfinder stated implicitly, this is the fields - not the charge of the currents - the "charge" of the fields (if it helps to think of it that way).  I am not sure, but I think a negative field would be a paradox.  What the field is taking in, it is expelling its opposite.  I think the concept of negative and positive is just to help us understand opposites.  It is something we are familiar with - but I don't think it is positive and negative in the conventional sense.  I think this can be further clarified in understanding the concept of matter.  If we assume that matter is just a build up of vibration (an extension of Mind), and where it "rolls in on itself" is the point matter begins, we see that all electrical flow is merely vibrational movement.  In this case, it follows a set path.  The build-up portion, the centripetal, the part that moves into itself and "gathers more of the same" (the male part) is the "positive" that we are discussing here.  This is the part that attracts itself, and dispels its opposite.  The opposite is that which tends to expand, tear down, the female etc.  The positive is the pressure, the build up, the tightening of the spring.  The negative is the relax, the return, the release of tension in the spring.  Positive is the outflow away from Mind, to the point it materializes in a solidified form, Negative is the inflow back to Mind, the tear down of the material solidified form.

It seems to me, the part that we are not tapping, is this positive side.  The part that it seems we only understand about is the negative.  What mainstream views as electricity seems to be the positive, and magnetism would be the negative.  It further seems that mainstream has the positive fixation (electron), and can only manipulate that portion - the portion that is the "effect" side of electricity.  The "cause side" (the negative) seems relatively untapped, and seems to be the "cold" electricity.  Most importantly, it seems mainstream insists on these being separated and split in order to function.  I think the concept here is they work together, harmoniously, simultaneously.

Again, keeping in mind we are talking about fields, not individual charges.  It seems to me that in order to get a field to "flow" (to move through a conduit) it must take on the nature of these explanations, and manifest itself as Erfinder has drawn.  Of course, this is the field, not the flow, but it must move in similar fashion.  I think this is evident in Leedkalnin's writings.  I think he was seeing both sides of the spiral simultaneously, and believed they were two opposite elements, not opposite manifestations of the same.

EDIT - added an explanation to help prevent a misquote

EDIT2 - corrected polarities and male-femaleness as I had them backwards

[Maximumgravity1]

I had another thought:

-The collapse of a magnetic field signals that we have transitioned from a condition where positive charge dominates to one where negative discharge dominates!

This explains why we see electricity and magnetism as opposites.  While we are inducing current to a coil through a magnetic flux line, we are attracting positive to positive.  When we cut that flux line, (collapse the magnetic field) we allow negative to dominate.  This explains why we see the same coin from two seperate sides.  This also explains why we are "bound" by the concept of "charged" particles.  We are manifesting the same thing (ALL CHICKENS) in two seperate ways.  We are only measuring each half of the flow at different times.

Have a drumstick, and your brain starts clicking.....I think I heard a click....LOL
I LOVE the chicken analogy......

[barbosi]

Everyone,

Reading I found an apparent contradiction, which I want to make you aware of (emphasis added on all quotes).

Positive Charge is associated with compression and implosion, Negative Discharge is associated with expansion, and explosion!!!

Then I taught: but Schauberger was working with implosion! Something's wrong here.
So keeping in mind that Negative Discharge = BEMF = explosion (expansion), I swept again through old messages and I found:

...
BEMF is the the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!).  The source is the VOID!Flow returning to the source is not restricted, nor resisted it is assisted, and self organizing in it's effort to return.  It is said that a magnetic fields collapse, but this has never been adquately explained.   BEMF is explosive radiation, the result of rapidly cavitating a flowing field.   Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void, as I said currents behave differently when they are pulsed, become familiar with this difference.  Flux lines are curved, curvature ends in the Void. 
...

I guess it will take a little while to chew this. I wouldn't be surprise to see some debate, in fact I'm curious to sign in.

Regards.

[allcanadian]

I think were off track again, I thought that was my job--confusing everyone.

We have-
Quote
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. 
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."

                                    The Universal One

Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF


In erfinders diagram it is clear electrical current(Emf) is the positive charge and negative discharge is Bemf. Negative discharge is also the magnetic field surrounding the current or positive charge in the diagram.
That which we detect circulating a current carrying conductor (in this instance our primary winding) and call magnetism is not magnetism!  It is negative discharge, it represents the expanded pole of electricity!
In this figure positive charge dominates negative discharge.  This is the nature of EMF!

So here is my theory--
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
- Electric fields attract electric fields and expels magnetic fields.
-Think about a capacitor, it has electric fields in attraction but no magnetic field.
- a magnetic field can push an electric one in a spark gap, so the electric field expels the magnetic.
-A current carrying conductor has an electric field in which the magnetic field surrounds outside the conductor(expeled)moving in the opposite direction.
This statement may simply state that the electric field will attract another electric field but will always repel the magnetic one, it's opposite.

[barbosi]

No allcanadian, was not your job to confuse and I don't think we are off track.
It's just another rock we past by, so I'll highlight differently.

...
BEMF is the the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!).  The source is the VOID!Flow returning to the source is not restricted, nor resisted it is assisted, and self organizing in it's effort to return.  It is said that a magnetic fields collapse, but this has never been adquately explained.   BEMF is explosive radiation, the result of rapidly cavitating a flowing field.   Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void, as I said currents behave differently when they are pulsed, become familiar with this difference.  Flux lines are curved, curvature ends in the Void. 
...

Don't you find odd that the explosion (BEMF) is the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!)? Explosion? Implosion? Read again whole quote because we got explanation in the end: "Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void" This IS a real unexpected twist.
Doesn't sound like the source is everywhere? Like our reality is "nowhere" and an explosion occurring in  "nowhere" will expand to "everywhere" to the source (the void)?
Oh, forget it... just someone explain please where is "in" and where is "out" because without understanding I cannot memorize this.

Cheers.