Reactive Current - Parallel RCL

[nix85]

Yes, deformation of magnetic field.

I highly recommend you to read what some our solar neighbours have to say about science..

I myself used to
wonder where these electrons came from.
They must have come from somewhere, but where?
They do not come from anywhere, they were generated within the magnetic field.
How? They are the result of a deformation brought about within the magnetic field
by the movement of the rotor.
Supposing we take this generator and enclose it in an airtight vessel, we still get a
flow of electrons as soon as we start the rotor turning, and if we had a pressure
gauge inside the vessel we would see that in spite of the large current flowing
between the two conductors, the atmospheric pressure would remain the same. This
being the case, we can define the electron as deformed magnetic space, propagated
in wave form. An eloquent proof that the electron is a wave form and not a particle
is obtained by refracting it through a spectrum.
There is an experiment that Earth scientists have done to prove this: a gamma ray (a
gamma ray is of electro-magnetic origin), when passing close to a nucleus, pulls an
electron away with it. It is true that the moment of inertia of the gamma ray is
changed. To explain this phenomenon they devised the rather thin hypothesis that
the ray's acceleration was transformed into energy, but it is absurd to believe that
the moment of inertia of a vector in space could be transformed into energy.
There is a relationship between energy and the force that imparts acceleration to a
body, but only a certain relationship. Water activates a turbine, but the gravitational
force which activated the water could never be turned into electrical energy.
All that happened then was that the rotor moved inside the generator and caused a
deformation of the magnetic space. The deformation that the points M' of the mass
M of the rotor brought about in the magnetic field corresponds to the force of
gravity in the water in a turbine.
If it is absurd to say that a vector moment creates energy, it would be even worse to
say that this moment generates matter, in other words that an electron is a particle.
The only rational explanation is that a gamma ray, being of electromagnetic origin,
deformed itself for an instant near the nucleus and from this deformation an
electron was created which must therefore be a charge of wave form........
...In the first instance God supplied the power that brings about the deformation of
space and the Sun, by an opposite process, turns it back into energy, thus reestablishing the balance.
Everything comes from God and everything returns to
Him.
That is why neither matter nor energy exist, but only deformed space, which is
called matter, and what you call energy is nothing more than a phenomenon of
transition between primordial space and deformed space.

https://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Dino%20Kraspedon%20-%20My%20Contact%20With%20Flying%20Saucers.pdf

[lancaIV]

Argument : http://www.quantumphysicslady.org/what-is-the-difference-between-an-electron-and-a-photon/

Photons have neither negative nor positive charge. They are not matter and have no mass. They travel the speed of light when in a vacuum like in outer space (which is not a complete vacuum, really). But they can travel much slower when traveling through a medium like water or even air.
Photons and electrons interact to create flows of electricity. Both are involved. Electricity is not merely a flow of electrons in a wire; it is also a flow of photons in an electromagnetic wave.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein-Gordon-Gleichung

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter#:~:text=In%20classical%20physics%20and%20general,up%20space%20by%20having%20volume.&text=Usually%20atoms%20can%20be%20imagined,which%20%22take%20up%20space%22.


In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume.

                 compared Your article sentence :


This being the case, we can define the electron as deformed magnetic space, propagated
in wave form.

                                           Photon : They are not matter and have no mass.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleon




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality

[nix85]

I'm aware mainstream paradigm thinks electron is "matter" and photon is not, but what is matter but standing waves. Collide two gamma rays and you'll get electron and positron. Also calling electron negative is arbitrary, it is negative relative to proton cause it is 1836 times smaller, it's gravitational field is much weaker than proton's gravitational field (vortex). Keep in mind everything is ultimately made of very very tiny NEUTRAL bubbles of energy, no polarity in them AT-ALL, so is something positive or negative is just function of size and direction of vortexial flow of these neutral bubbles. These neutral bubbles that make up everything cascade from the Godhead being smallest and most numerous at the source level, then by ratio of 49 they condense into ever larger bubbles that form smallest bubbles of lower planes, this goes on on all 7 great cosmic planes and ratio below is given just for our, lowest of 7 cosmic planes.

[lancaIV]

concret or abstract by conventional quantum physics theorem ( with opposition)


https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantentheorie_der_Ur-Alternativen

[nix85]

Lanca kilometer links again