It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
. . . Thermodynamics and Conservation (Physics) without Cryodynamics and Liberation (Magnetics) is like Male with no Female. . . .
An object in orbit, ( O ) around a fulcrum, ( . ) will gain weight 180 degrees opposite its fulcrum and equal in proportion to the Centripetal spin force initiating / maintaining that orbit.
That weight will shift to always remain 180 degrees to it's fulcrum while on the zero point of the x axis. (Ring of weight)
And since all motion is Polarized, this will result in a N / S establishing themselves on top and bottom of that ring.
Orbit = added weight = electricity = heat = resistance = inertia ( I )
Centripetal Spin = less / inverse weight = Magnetism = cold =
zero resistance ( Ω / ω )
North and South poles of a magnet are indication of the MOVEMENT of the flux.
The Negative Polarity on the top is circulating in while the Negative Polarity on the bottom is circulating out.
THE CIRCULATION OF FLUX IS NOT THE SAME AS POLARITY.
The vortex created by whatever is spinning in a Centripetal fashion is SUCKING IN both top and bottom of the Magnet.
But the movement of the flux itself is folding inward at the top of the toroid (donut) and looping back around to fold in the top again.
THE PATH OF THE FLUX ITSELF IS NOT THE SAME PATH AS OBJECTS WITHIN THAT FLUX. . . .
How are your lens not tainted? What about the physicists who disagree with your point of view? You blanket accuse them of not being able to think for themselves because they disagree with your metaphysics. Why don't you have an open mind and consider your ideas might be wrong? Or does the trait of open-mindedness belong only to people who disagree with establishment views?
But it's more ridiculous than that! I can prove that the silly claims in this thread are WRONG, therefore it's a non-starter for an ignoramus like you. And just for the record, I'm not a former physics teacher, I was an instructor at a university when I went to graduate school.
Teflon does not conduct electricity. A magnet does not act as a "diode". There is no black hole inside the atomic nucleus. The more you keep repeating these mantras, the further you progress on the road to laughing stock. And you've gone a long way, baby.
I am amazed by the disdain you show towards mathematical reasoning yet still espouse a WSM interpretation which is WHOLLY mathematical. Particles are actually observed, while considering it all to be a wave is filling in gaps which may not be justifiable in the end without experimental verification.
Originally posted by beebs
And I believe Arb is a former teacher, if my memory is correct.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by Mary Rose
Hey we have something in common then! I was teaching university freshmen part time in courses that have lots of formulas but I had to stop because of my travel schedule, but since I'm not traveling as much anymore I might start again.
Originally posted by beebs
And besides, didn't someone already mention the dielectric properties of teflon?
It is specifically being used as a type of 'dam' for EM energy in the SEG, Searl has mentioned this. Case closed.
The dam itself is the dielectric material Teflon.
The electrons will accelerate from the rare earth material in an organized fashion
through the teflon like water shooting out of a pressurized and controlled hole
in a dam.
The teflon can only hold back so much electron pressure just like a dam can only
hold so much water pressure.
The electrons will pass through the teflon into the ferrite permanent magnet
layer where they are accelerated outward in a ring. The magnets act as the diode
and one way valve.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
So according to that demented Searl person . . .
Are you tying to be ironic or are you just not aware that this whole WSM deal is just an elaborate mathematical model? No, particles are an excellent model, and they predict many things that have been confirmed. If you took your time reading texts on mathematics you would be aware of the limitations of mathematical theories and it would be quite obvious particles are the best way to model reality, because nature does not act continuous. You have to create a whole ulterior theory of why nature behaves like particles despite being a wave. Again, what would the theory predict that can be validated, except for one's personal philosophical preferences? It seems like the only thing that determines whether an idea is correct or not is whether its accepted by most scientists. If it's not, it must be correct and cutting edge! Or why else would you argue for Haramein's silly claim that there is a black hole within every atom?
So according to that demented Searl person, the electrons DO pass through teflon.
Then, you accuse me of wanting to be spoon fed information. What bullsh!t! It is me who actually READS this and analyzes details of this poor excuse of physics discourse, and doesn't just swallow this dung line, hook and sinker as you and Mary do.