Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

[dllabarre]

Don:

You don't have to do it like that.  Just select "Show replies to your posts" from the menu at the top left of any page and it will show all of the topics you posted in, and when you select a topic, it will take to right where you had left off.  This way, you will not miss any posts in any topics you have posted in and are following.

I hope this helps.  Nice work on your experiments.

Bill

That's awesome.... 

Thanks Bill

DonL

[Magneticitist]

@rosemary that sounds similar to my belief that all mass has alternating current and the rate at which this current alternates within the mass is relative to its mass and density. the vibrations in all matter signify to me a non linear or non directional movement. the magnetic poles, opposite ends of the same extreme, as all things are, are in perfect balance within mass with no directional or linear movement. i think if a vibrating piece of matter at rest were to have one of its energetic "poles" removed, it would physically travel in that direction. so rather than "pushing" on an object i suppose we are actually pulling away its ability to resist.
alot of energy is exerted when destroying dense matter and likewise the same amount of energy is released from the matter. we know this is true because we hear sound from friction.

i think when we move the rotor we are actually offsetting one of its alternating poles, dependent upon the relative direction we interact with it, and release some of its mass energy in the opposite direction as it tries to compensate and restore balance. i think we are providing an "S" for its "N" to travel to so to speak. to me all of this is relevant to our comprehension of time and space.

far as electrons, i like your theory, except I have never managed to fully grasp the idea of the electron or proton or any of these subatomics.
it has always seemed clear to me magnetism is the inverse of electricity and vice versa in the yin yang of things. likewise N and S, positive and negative, inverse directions of each other exactly. we also have current which is heat and voltage which is cold. but hot and cold are just opposites of the same extreme so "hot" and "cold" are flowing down the same "wire" if that makes any sense.

so my understanding of the two (non-textbook conformed of course) is that if an N pole is the exact opposite of an S pole, then positive should be the exact opposite of a negative. electrons are not conventionally explained to be the exact opposite of the proton, whom both are conventionally explained as positive and negative.
to be honest the electron proton positron neutron graviton all seem like bunch of nonsense to me and a huge complication of something alot more simple. we have charge, fields, and gravity. i think the charge and the field oscillate which creates the third force of gravity, similar to the third force in a gyro when spun AND moved axially.

these of course are just my insane theories =)

[Pirate88179]

Gravity, supposedly according to current accepted theory, is made up of a single particle called a graviton.  The more mass a body has, the more gravitons it has and therefore the larger its gravitational field.  IE, the moon vs the earth.

Now, in some respects, this appears to me to be a dirty way of explaining observed phenomena.  But, I do think it is related to mass in some way.  Does the graviton really exist?  I have no idea.  But, mass does exist and the more mass, the larger the gravitational field so, what are we left with?

Magnetism and electricity may indeed mess with the gravitational field but possibly no more than it would with any other form of mass?  I do not think that electricity and magnetism are directly related to gravity itself in its most fundamental form, graviton or not.

Bill

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Gravity, supposedly according to current accepted theory, is made up of a single particle called a graviton.  The more mass a body has, the more gravitons it has and therefore the larger its gravitational field.  IE, the moon vs the earth.

Now, in some respects, this appears to me to be a dirty way of explaining observed phenomena.  But, I do think it is related to mass in some way.  Does the graviton really exist?  I have no idea.  But, mass does exist and the more mass, the larger the gravitational field so, what are we left with?

Magnetism and electricity may indeed mess with the gravitational field but possibly no more than it would with any other form of mass?  I do not think that electricity and magnetism are directly related to gravity itself in its most fundamental form, graviton or not.

Bill

Hi Pirate.  I think our classicists look for a particle of sorts to be the exchange carrier.  At this stage the electron - well known - is attributed to the electromagnetic force and - as you say the graviton to gravity.  But the graviton has NEVER been seen and is only theorised.  The only particles that are known to be stable are the proton - electron and photon.  All others have a limited life.  And the graviton like the quark and even the 'dark particle' are all theoretically required - never observed.  Most classicists subscribe to the graviton and very few to the required 'dark matter'.  Those that DO uphold the dark matter particle are mostly astophysicists and string theorists. 

But there are no known answers to this and none of the above particles account for the Casimir effect - or the mass/size ratio of the proton to the electron - or to the actual charge carrier of current flow (albeit that some use the electron) together with a host of inexplicable paradoxes in physics.  All these questions have effectively been asked since the turn of the century and STILL NO ANSWERS.  At least our dark matter theorists and string theorists subscribe to some kind of aether.  But they NEVER actually refer to it as AETHER.  That's simply politically incorrect.  LOL

Bill, I'd be very glad to get a better idea of the earth battery and the work you guys have been doing on the Joule Thief.  Is there any way you could give a brief overview.  If it's a huge ask then I'll just plough through the thread and see if I can make sense of it.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

@rosemary that sounds similar to my belief that all mass has alternating current and the rate at which this current alternates within the mass is relative to its mass and density. the vibrations in all matter signify to me a non linear or non directional movement. the magnetic poles, opposite ends of the same extreme, as all things are, are in perfect balance within mass with no directional or linear movement. i think if a vibrating piece of matter at rest were to have one of its energetic "poles" removed, it would physically travel in that direction. so rather than "pushing" on an object i suppose we are actually pulling away its ability to resist.
alot of energy is exerted when destroying dense matter and likewise the same amount of energy is released from the matter. we know this is true because we hear sound from friction.

i think when we move the rotor we are actually offsetting one of its alternating poles, dependent upon the relative direction we interact with it, and release some of its mass energy in the opposite direction as it tries to compensate and restore balance. i think we are providing an "S" for its "N" to travel to so to speak. to me all of this is relevant to our comprehension of time and space.

far as electrons, i like your theory, except I have never managed to fully grasp the idea of the electron or proton or any of these subatomics.
it has always seemed clear to me magnetism is the inverse of electricity and vice versa in the yin yang of things. likewise N and S, positive and negative, inverse directions of each other exactly. we also have current which is heat and voltage which is cold. but hot and cold are just opposites of the same extreme so "hot" and "cold" are flowing down the same "wire" if that makes any sense.

so my understanding of the two (non-textbook conformed of course) is that if an N pole is the exact opposite of an S pole, then positive should be the exact opposite of a negative. electrons are not conventionally explained to be the exact opposite of the proton, whom both are conventionally explained as positive and negative.
to be honest the electron proton positron neutron graviton all seem like bunch of nonsense to me and a huge complication of something alot more simple. we have charge, fields, and gravity. i think the charge and the field oscillate which creates the third force of gravity, similar to the third force in a gyro when spun AND moved axially.

these of course are just my insane theories =)

LOL Magneticitist - we NONE of us know.  And I'm entirely satisfied that anyone's model is OK provided it gives the predicted result.  The hell of it is to try and understand those things that are NOT that usual - like current flow from two metals and nothing else.  It's begging answers.  And I'm an obsessive compulsive when it comes to questions.   

Take care,
Kindest regards,
Rosemary