Primer Fields

Whoa... what if all monopoles existed in this state of relativity? Can we ever have the existence of one polarity with the other? Our delving into "the Work" and other scientific observations seems to suggest that that is not the case. Yin and Yang, STS vs. STO, Being and Non-Being, electron vs proton, electron up-spin vs electron down-spin, 1 vs 0 (computer binary). All of these ideas seem to co-exist together. However, there can always be a great imbalance within their structure of co-existence but at the end of the day it appears as though one cannot exist without the other.

I think this is how monopoles must exist. Both polarities can be witnessed, but one is significantly stronger than the other. Sometimes the imbalance is so pronounced that it effectively behaves as a monopole. How could one create this condition artificially? Through geometry; this may be why the parabola or parabaloid (3 dimensional) is used in the primer fields, which supposedly explains everything else. It creates that unbalance. The concave side concentrates while the convex side dissipates. This would also explain why you would need two of these parabolic magnetic fields (with opposite north south magnetic fields) to create an atom or galaxy. Both of which seems to arise out of two parabolic magnetic fields that balance themselves.

He suggest that if one of these magnetic parabolas exist singularly it would tend towards being a pulsar. That is interesting indeed.
 
Upon further analysis, it seems to me that the magnetic bowls are acting as artificial monopoles. This appears to take place because the geometry allows for them to inherently posses two different polarities while simultaneously significantly concentrating one at a focal point. Consequently, the pole that is NOT being concentrated at the parabolic focal point is dissipated or greatly reduced in strength.

For what i can understand of the subject, that seems to be the case. At least i was thinking in the same line of thought.

The only thing we can be certain is that visually the experiment in the vacuum chamber and cosmic phenomena are similar. Since no other hard evidence is supplied, mathematics or physics (not that i would understand them anyway :() it is just a good hypotheses. It would be interesting to know for example if this magnetic fields with a bowl shape are indeed detected in outer space (don't even know if that is possible with our current technology).

Whoa... what if all monopoles existed in this state of relativity? Can we ever have the existence of one polarity with the other? Our delving into "the Work" and other scientific observations seems to suggest that that is not the case. Yin and Yang, STS vs. STO,

Well, taking the Yin and Yang as an example, Chinese philosophy takes yin and yang as relative concepts regarding one another. For example, our sun is Yang in relation to the earth, because it is hotter and creates light, and son on ... But we could compare our Sun with another star that is brighter and hotter, thus our Sun would be Yin. If we look at the Tai Chi symbol (the black and with circle) we do have one polarity with another (both are present) it just depends which one is more prevalent.
 
Am I the only one who 'smells something fishy' with this group of videos?? Unfortunately, I can't yet formulate in words why I am suspicious. I do think, with agreement from my feelings, that his hypothesis of magnetic field shapes - re: bowls - is in line with the observed universe. Something in his presentation, however, puts me immediately 'on guard', and I can't quite define it. Hmmm.

Kris
 
RflctnOfU said:
Am I the only one who 'smells something fishy' with this group of videos?? Unfortunately, I can't yet formulate in words why I am suspicious. I do think, with agreement from my feelings, that his hypothesis of magnetic field shapes - re: bowls - is in line with the observed universe. Something in his presentation, however, puts me immediately 'on guard', and I can't quite define it. Hmmm.

Kris

Interesting. I think I've had this impression at some point as well but just like you, I don't really know why for the moment. Maybe it has to do with the fact he seems to talk as if all the mysteries of the universe can be easily explained by his theory (like overconfidence). I can't say.

Again, it could be disinformation based on Truth. Sometimes, it doesn't take much to really lead someone astray even if the basis are right. The devil's always in the details. Anyhow, as far as the actual physics is concerned, I am not skilled enough to really say how good or bad it is although yes, it does seem to contain a lot of good stuff going in-line with many things discussed on this board as much as the experiments done in the lab really do show us something significant, osit.

Please let us know if you figure out something.

Peace.
 
Yea I am with you there Jaymark and RflctOfU. I came across the video after contemplating some ideas about energy in the shape of a parabolas/ paraboloids, but they were not both facing away from each other like they were in the video. I also sensed an attitude of overconfidence (in the primer field videos) and when self-importance starts to reign supreme that tends to cloud judgment.

I'll do some more studying and experiments at home. But I appreciate all of the feedback here; Thank you all!

P.S. one thing that sticks out in my mind right now, as i'm reading Gnosis, is the mention of how everything exist as two polarities (In regards to the 3 centers of man). This of course reminds me of some other co-linear ideas mentioned in Ouspensky's " The Fourth Way". I'll try to get everything put together in a separate post to see what you guys think.


Let us now examine the initial phenomenon of Creation, and the polarization of the sexes in its application to man. We know the complete
diagram of the human being:

9k5iPB3.png

(Figure 59 attached below)


This diagram does not show the polarization of the indivisible centres.
With the higher and sexual centres polarized, the diagram for a man would
look as follows:

nSrA4Eo.png

(Figure 60 attached below)

The diagram for a woman is naturally polarized in relation to that of
man. Placed one beside the other, these figures give the following
configuration:

MIcpqa3.png

(Figure 61 attached below)

In its ensemble, the last diagram represents the complete being. As such,
this being integrally reflects the manifested Absolute in the created
Universe — in all its aspects.
We can clearly see now that it is the Androgyne who constitutes a true
Microcosmos, not the isolated man or woman. On an infinitesimal scale,44
this encompasses all the elements which the Macrocosmos contains in
infinitely great proportions. We must note regarding this subject that,
according to the Bible, the creation of man in the image and likeness of
God was in the form of the Androgyne: this description in fact refers to
the time before the fall of Adam, meaning, before the disintegration of
the joint astral body of the two polar beings.

From the above dialogue and companioning diagrams, Mouravieff (Gnosis I pg. 246-247) describes the separated male and female beings as being polar. However, they still both contain both "charges or polarities" but with one being much more pronounced than the other. Supposedly this is why they
would only make up the total Androgyne when they come together. Compelling and food for thought.

It also seems to adhere to the hermetic maxim of " As Above so Below" when pondering the concepts in Gnosis along side parabolic (relative) monopoles. I can't help but thinking that "The magic happens" when they come together.
 

Attachments

  • completepolarization.png
    completepolarization.png
    36.5 KB · Views: 39
  • manpolar.png
    manpolar.png
    37.5 KB · Views: 38
  • polars together.png
    polars together.png
    69.4 KB · Views: 38
Green_Manalishi said:
That is a shame, since it seemed he was going to tie it with ancient megalith structures and some other interesting subjects on those future parts.

I have an idea about this along with diagrams I've drawn but it's taking me awhile to put it all together for a separate post. I have just recently built up the courage to share all of this and I don't know if it's the correct concept but based on some algebraic and geometrical calculations, along with inspiration from the books and transcripts posted here, it goes in line with and would be a sound hypothesis for why the ancients preferred circular/spiral megaliths or pyramids. They usually had one or the other but they could both serve the same function.

Again a lot of this could just be conjecture and wasted time/energy away from working towards being prepared. However, all of this usually floods in when I'm either doing the breathing exercises or reading books related to the work so I just had to start writing it all down I guess. At the very least it helps me understand what I'm reading (Ouspensky, Gurdjieff, Mouravieff, etc.) so maybe it could help others?
 
Does this look familiar to anyone?

http://frenchtribune.com/teneur/1317015-us-astronomers-discover-new-type-supernova

notice the two parabolas.
 
Perhaps there is a bit of over-confidence, specially when there is not a lot of data to back this up. Just some very similar type of phenomenons (visually) and a reasonable idea to relate the two. Other then that i don't feel any "fishiness".
 
Green_Manalishi said:
Perhaps there is a bit of over-confidence, specially when there is not a lot of data to back this up. Just some very similar type of phenomenons (visually) and a reasonable idea to relate the two. Other then that i don't feel any "fishiness".

I think it goes a bit beyond over-confidence. It is intimated that this 'discovery' is THE answer to everything. I seriously question his Understanding of Things (that is, understanding in G's sense), especially his discussion of light. It is a logical extrapolation based on observation of magnetic fields, but it smacks of 'wiseacring', again in G's sense. ANYTHING can be proved with 'logic' and the right presentation. What I just mentioned is the 'husk', if you will, of the content of the 'red flags waving' in my inner world. I am still trying to figure out what the 'pith' is. Perhaps the lack of DATA is a big part of it. Going further, maybe it is the CONSTANT repetition of him saying the same things, with the musical score to back it up...it's as if there is an attempt to program my mind into accepting what is being said - it also seems presented on a 6th or 7th grade level. IMHO, there is lots of 'fishiness' in this.

BTW, has anyone dug into his background? I am not the best 'scourer' of the net - I made an initial dig and wasn't able to find ANYTHING, other than a facebook page (or the youtube page), of which network I am not a part. Be interesting to see what his background is.

Kris
 
RflctnOfU said:
I think it goes a bit beyond over-confidence. It is intimated that this 'discovery' is THE answer to everything. I seriously question his Understanding of Things (that is, understanding in G's sense), especially his discussion of light. It is a logical extrapolation based on observation of magnetic fields, but it smacks of 'wiseacring', again in G's sense. ANYTHING can be proved with 'logic' and the right presentation. What I just mentioned is the 'husk', if you will, of the content of the 'red flags waving' in my inner world. I am still trying to figure out what the 'pith' is. Perhaps the lack of DATA is a big part of it. Going further, maybe it is the CONSTANT repetition of him saying the same things, with the musical score to back it up...it's as if there is an attempt to program my mind into accepting what is being said - it also seems presented on a 6th or 7th grade level. IMHO, there is lots of 'fishiness' in this.

BTW, has anyone dug into his background? I am not the best 'scourer' of the net - I made an initial dig and wasn't able to find ANYTHING, other than a facebook page (or the youtube page), of which network I am not a part. Be interesting to see what his background is.

Kris

I think you nail it down pretty well here.

The "Answer to Everything" flavor is indeed a red flag.

Then about light, I concur that I was quite disappointed by his presentation although it's just an inner feeling. It seems like something fundamental is missing and the way he discusses about the wave-particle duality was kind of peculiar for me.

He does repeat things a lot, like if he is trying to "implement" thoughts in us or maybe I'm just a bit too paranoid here. And sometimes, the animations just go on and on, always the same sequence repeating itself in a loop. Why wasting so much time and not just go directly to the point if time is really an issue for him as stated on his youtube account? He could have just basically condensed all the matter he discusses in under a single video and I don't think it would have been much harder to understand.

Also there is the whole aspect of consciousness, strangeness etc. that he never mentions. A real "theory of everything" has to include "everything", no? He just focuses on the physical aspect of the universe which is matter/energy so to speak. Basically, he only goes over the "basic" stuff. What about gravity? What about quantum phenomenons such as tunneling and entanglement? The "multiverse"? What about anti-matter and superluminal travel? "Time"? Etc. I could go on for quite a while actually.

Did he work on this all by himself? Who are all the others implicated in this - if any? Who is he indeed? There is virtually no real background that I can find either unfortunately.

He could have a very good point about the Primer Fields themselves (magnetic fields), which could explain many things, but that would just be this at most. It wouldn't, imho, be anywhere close to a real "Theory of Everything".

My thoughts. Peace.
 
Wow! Those magnets he uses can replicate Saturn's hexagon shape at the poles. I was wondering how it could be only a mere coincidence :huh:
 
The way in which LaPoint has ended the video series is certainly strange, and I’m not sure what to think of that either, although it’s suspicious. After watching the videos, the immediate question is “why parabolic magnetic fields?” LaPoint seems to be reporting just what he’s observed and the results of his experiments based on those observations, so who knows if he had planned to give an answer to this later in the series or not.

Some of his main points in the series are:

• Magnetic fields are an intrinsic part of matter – you can’t have a particle of matter unless magnetic fields are there to form and confine it
• Magnetic parabolic fields push multiple spheres together into geometrically regular patterns, so they’re candidates for the strong force in atoms
• The spacing between the two magnetic parabola controls the strength of the field, thus controlling the spacing of orbits (presumably at both micro and macro scales)
• The spacing also controls the spin rate of a photon – the smaller the photon, the higher the spin rate and the greater the energy level – this might be true at macro levels as well (i.e. in relation to the Earth’s rate of rotation and “opening up” phenomena)
• Particles get trapped between the flip ring and choke ring, which compresses matter inside the confinement dome

One thing I noticed when he superimposed a picture of the sun onto the parabolic structure was that the region between the flip ring and the choke ring appeared to be about 19.5 degrees (where people usually locate the points in a tetrahedral model):

7/3/99 said:
A: […] Maybe 19.5 is due to crustal slippages in some “land mark” event?!

Q: (A) […] Is the circumference important?
A: It is important.

A: […] All Hoagland has done is highlight a point at which magnetic lines converge using the tetrahedron model.

Q: […] How does the tetrahedron model relate to trans-dimensional space?
A: A key which unlocks the door.

A: […] Magnetism.

Q: Are you supposed to generate magnetism, or is it natural magnetism?
A: Natural.

A: […] Off the point we told you before that all spheres of cosmic nature are windows.

So this could be read to indicate that Hoagland had found something relevant at the approximate latitude of 19.5 degrees, but that the tetrahedral model wasn’t necessarily the best explanation for it. Also, the “flip point” is right in the middle, where the Cs say windows are supposed to exist in rotating spheres from the micro to macro level.

There are a couple of other things that may or may not be relevant to this – they all involve physics and math, so I’m posting in the hopes that they’re either useful to people who understand these things better than I do, or that those same people can point out what the flaws in the theories are, hopefully without creating too much noise.

One is an idea that’s been elaborated on by John Milewski, in which he postulates a form of radiation called “magenetic-electricity” or “magnetricity” (he calls it "superlight", which basically means "superluminal light") which is supposed to be the converse of electromagnetism. He derives this by plugging negative numbers into Maxwell’s equations (I’ll have to ask the mathematicians here if that’s “legal” or not). One part of his hypothesis is that gravity (in conventional terms) is a “push” force, not an attractive force. This is Milewski’s explanation from his website:

WHAT IS SUPERLIGHT ?

[…] SuperLight was identified scientifically over 100 years ago when James Clerk Maxwell solved his famous wave equation. This occurred shortly after radio was invented by Nikola Tesla, and theoretical physicists tried to find a mathematical model to explain radio waves. When using positive numbers in Maxwell's Equations this explains radio waves and also all forms of electro–magnetic radiation such as light, radio, TV, microwaves, x–rays, etc. What his equation also explains 100 years ago was SuperLight but because it was the solution that comes from the use of negative numbers, "this second solution" was ignored for over 100 years. Remember when you were taught algebra and were told to ignore imaginary numbers (e.g. The square root of –1) because they have no meaning in this world. Well, times have changed and now we have a very valid second solution to Maxwell's equation and it is SuperLight.

To understand this second solution, we must first review what the first or positive solution explains. The first solution is as follows: Radio waves leave the antenna and radiate out into space from a point source (the antenna) equally in all directions into space toward infinity traveling at the speed of light. The wave is composed of a large electrical component and a small magnetic component 90 degrees to the electrical component. Thus named, electro–magnetic radiation.

[…] The second solution describes a particle wave of just the opposite structure. It explains that from infinity traveling toward the point source from all directions radiates SuperLight. This new radiation is composed of a large magnetic component and a small electrical component, thus the name, magneto–electric radiation. When the equations are looked at more closely, one finds that "SuperLight" travels at the speed of light squared ! 1020 meters per second, or 10 billion times faster than light. It has a frequency 10 billion times higher, and has a corresponding, shorter wavelength. It therefore has a higher energy density. The question one asks immediately is, "if it is so powerful, how come we do not feel it, or how come it is not detected scientifically?" Well, the frequency is so high, its wave length so short, (4 x 10–8 nano–meters, or 4 x 10–17 meters), its velocity so fast, that it goes through everything as though the substance was nearly completely transparent (like glass).

WHERE DOES SUPERLIGHT COME FROM?

[…] Regular electro–magnetic radiation or light is formed when electric monopoles give off energy. The electron in orbit about our atoms is an electric monopole — as it changes its orbit it either gives off or absorbs energy in the form of electro–magnetic radiation. Sunlight is converted into electricity by this process in a solar cell. Just the opposite occurs in optical diodes, which convert electricity into light. So, electro-magnetic radiation or visible light is produced when an electron (an electric monopole) lowers its orbit and releases its energy in the form of light.

Now, I believe a similar event occurs in the extremely dense and hot matter found in black holes. It is theorized that black holes contain magnetic monopoles and when these extremely dense, extremely small, extremely energetic magnetic monopoles release energy by lowering their orbit they radiate magneto–electric radiation, our SuperLight. So black holes really are not so black. They are radiant beings of SuperLight. Of course SuperLight escapes the strong gravitation forces {this doesn’t seem to line up with his explanation of gravity below} of the black holes because its velocity is the square of the velocity of light and it therefore, can easily escape.

The current scientific thinking is that in the center of every galaxy in the universe is a black hole. There are billions and billions of galaxies all around us, and they all are producing SuperLight. We are literally bathed in a three-dimensional dynamic energy field, or an "Ether" of SuperLight — a Dynamic Ether.

SUPERLIGHT and LIFE

I believe that SuperLight is the prime activating energy in the universe and accounts for the production of what we call life. I believe SuperLight interacts with special forms of matter in our bodies and produces what we call Vital Life Forces. These special forms of matter are found in bones, micro–crystals and also in the various fluids in the body that contain cell salts. There are also believed to be organic molecules in some body fluids that are believed to be liquid crystalline in structure. These change state (liquid to crystal) very readily, with a extremely small change in energy (e.g. emotions). {Interestingly, Milewski recommends bone broth as one way to enhance these structures}

Another form of organized structure found in the body are the multitude of long parallel conductive protein structures that form phase array-like structures. Like the phased array radio telescope in Socorro, New Mexico, they pick up extreme weak signals and amplify them by being in phase. It is also suggested that these proteins may have room temperature superconductivity. It is these organized structures in living things that produce a coherence that has resonance with very minute amounts of SuperLight. Most of it passes through matter, between the nucleus and electron, without even coming in contact with them. {Milewski also says that Stonehenge was built out of a paramagnetic ring on the top and a (I think) diamagnetic ring on the bottom, which allowed people to utilize magneto-electricity when inside the structure via some kind of physical resonance}

Our body is electronic in nature and it is composed of millions and billions of micro–electronic units that are formed in structures that have a phase array organization. I believe that the electronic resonance in these organized conductive molecules have some resonance with very small amounts of SuperLight and that these energy fields and currents are responsible for the human aura and the energy vortexes found in the body chakra area. They also produce the Vital Life Forces. But, since SuperLight is so powerful, even a very, very small amount produces more than enough energy to sustain life. Thus, life is produced and sustained by specific forms and amounts of organized matter, and old age and eventual death occurs when too much disorder and disease comes into our bodies and breaks up this ordered structure. At that point, the body can no longer produce enough Vital Life Force from SuperLight to sustain itself. I also believe that all forms of organized matter produce its own aura–finger–prints or energy signature when it reacts with SuperLight. {All of this puts an interesting perspective on both the idea of growing a magnetic center as well as frequency resonance vibration – as well as suggesting a means by which comets might interact with humanity via the information represented magnetically.}

SUPERLIGHT AND GRAVITY

Gravity is not an intrinsic property of matter, neither is inertia. These secondary forces are both formed by the reaction of matter to the dynamic field of SuperLight. Gravity is not an attraction! It is the result of a universal pressure, exerted by SuperLight as it rains in from infinity, from all directions, onto every object. Materials are not 100% transparent to SuperLight. I estimate perhaps about 99.99999999% transparent. As a consequence, all material domains, all "matter", experiences an acceleration caused by SuperLight. Every "particle" is affected by a slight drag, or pressure differential, as SuperLight travels past and through them.

Quantum Particle Interactions, come into play as SuperLight joins in, or exits the activities of the particle domain. Field effects come into play, as the SuperLight Entity travels through the Atomic Atmosphere producing drag. Drag turbulence and particle pressures combine to produce the accelerational force we know as gravity. This acceleration is of little consequence when a single object is in space, at a very great distance from other objects, since the force vectors cancel out. However, when a second object comes close to the first object, then, the two objects shield each other from the full power of SuperLight pressure on the opposite sides of the objects facing each other. As a result of this, the objects experience a net accelerational force toward each other, which is directly proportional to their mass. Mass that produces the mutual shielding that each object experiences. Thus, falsely, each object is said to be attracted to each other! In reality, they are being pushed together by the net differential force of SuperLight pressure which results from the slight absorption of SuperLight as it passes through these objects. This, according to my theory, is what creates gravity. It is a push exerted by SuperLight, on objects shielding each other, from a portion of the SuperLight radiation.

Gravity then becomes the "Weak Force", from the effects of porous matter. An atom of matter is about 1018 parts void for each part of solid matter. The wavelength of SuperLight is much smaller than the typical atomic dimension. Thus, most of SuperLight passes through the atomic structure unopposed. However, when SuperLight contacts the nucleus or electrons it produces the force that holds the electrons in orbit, and the nucleus together. It is the nuclear glue. This gives matter its chemical properties. Thus, gravity is the weak force since only a very small amount of SuperLight interacts with matter on the atomic scale. An example that will give you some idea as to how porous solid matter is, as follows: Let us expand the nucleus of an atom to the size of a golf ball, then the electrons in orbit about this nucleus would be about the size of a pea. Now when this pea makes its orbit about the golf ball its orbit is not a few feet or even a few yards in diameter, its orbit is about 2 miles in diameter. Matter is mostly composed of void or space and the energy rays of SuperLight, whose wavelength is many times smaller than the diameter of the electron, will to a large extent miss the particle regions, as it rains through the atomic region. Only a small amount of SuperLight interacts with the nucleus and electrons while the majority will pass right through the region.

NUCLEAR FORCE

The structure of the nucleus is extremely dense, when compared to that of the atom as a whole. The particles of matter in the nucleus are much closer to each other, than those in the electron. The nucleus is probably in the order of 1028 more dense. Thus, the force that holds the nucleus together, must be very strong. In reality, it is still the effects of SuperLight pushing and interacting that holds the components of [the] nucleus together. These stronger interactions on the nucleus are a result of its increased relative density and ability to shield SuperLight. It is the density and geometry of matter that changes the forces we see. Thus, from One Source, comes the One Force, that divides and manifests itself in so many interesting ways. The relative packing symmetry is very critical in the nucleus and this accounts for the relative stability of various nuclei {this is similar to what LaPoint seems to be describing}. A less symmetrical structure results in radioactivity and an unstable nucleus. In this way, SuperLight helps to explain radioactivity.

SUPERLIGHT IS THE SINGULARITY

[…] I propose that SuperLight energy is the singularity or universal energy force in all nature and that its interaction with various forms of matter and energy produce all other forces in the Universe. Specific atomic structures and sub-atomic structures are resonant to and interact with some aspects of SuperLight as it passes through them and our bodies. The energy that is absorbed is converted into the electrical, magnetic, nuclear and gravitational forces producing our vital life force. This can explain all the forces of nature and life energies. It is the geometry and density of matter that explains the different forms and intensity of the forces that are produced.

Here is a bit more on magnetic monopoles by Milewski:

The Effects of Magnetite, Magnetic Water and Magnetic Monopoles on Plant Growth

[…] First I refer to the classic work that Phillip S. Callahan PhD as presented in his book “]Ancient Mysteries and Modern Visions” chapters seven, eight and nine about magnetic monopoles. His explanation of what magnetic monopoles are and how they are formed, I have found to be very enlightening and it lays the basis for all of my future understanding of what is happening in what I will be presenting.

We know that here on Earth we cannot make a magnetic monopole by just breaking a bar magnet in half. When we do this both broken halves instantly develop another magnetic pole opposite to the pole on the other end. Apparently a tremendous amount of energy is needed to separate these magnetic poles. Callahan says this is done by the sun whenever it has solar flares. He says the sun is emitting magnetic dipoles all the time but when there are solar flares and the dipoles go through these solar flares they are exposed to very high temperature energy sources. These magnetic storms are sufficient to break apart these dipoles into monopoles both north and south which continue to radiate out into space and eventually some of them fall to our earth.

Callahan says that the north magnetic monopoles come in and are attracted to the plants, tree leaves and green vegetation while the south magnetic monopoles are attracted to the soil, rocks and stones. In normal plant growth the south magnetic monopoles migrate through the soil to the roots of the plants. At the same time the north magnetic monopoles are attracted to the plant leaves. This combination gives the plants a magnetic dipole charge. As a result the south magnetic monopoles in the soil are attracted to the roots of the plants and, as Callahan says, the roots act as wave guides for the south poles to run up through plant stem to recombine with their former mates, the north poles, that are waiting for them in the plant leaves. This recombination releases a large amount of energy that the plant uses to support the photosynthesis process.

Photosynthesis has always been a mystery to scientists, because there is not enough energy in sunlight alone to break up the water and CO2 molecules. If this was so, the sun would decompose the oceans by just shining on them and there would be no CO2 in the atmosphere. So additional energy is coming from somewhere and I suggest that it is coming from the recombination of magnetic monopoles.

Some scientists say that the photosynthesis process is catalyzed by the chlorophyll molecule. This is also true but may I suggest that maybe the chlorophyll molecule gets some extra energy help from magnetic monopole union and subsequent energy release. We will talk about this idea of how chlorophyll helps later in the paper when I start talking about how this magnetic energy helps humans and look at the hemoglobin molecule in our blood which structurally and energetically is very similar to chlorophyll.

[…] Let's start with the conductivity of electrons (or, called by another name, electric monopoles). A wire for electron conductivity consists of a electron conductor like a metal which is covered by a non-conductor material like a plastic which is an electron insulator. This covering keeps the electrons from running off to other materials that it may contact and keeps the electric monopoles flowing in one direction.

Now I propose that there is parity in the universe between electric monopoles and magnetic monopoles. So, according to this theory, a good conductor for magnetic monopoles would consist of just the opposite structure. We would want an insulator like a plastic covered by an electric conductor. How wonderful nature is that it provides just that structure in the plant's root stems, and branches. The core of the plant root stems and branches is a wood-like material like cellulose (a natural plastic material) which is covered by a bark-like material which contains a water like sap which is an electrical conductor. Callahan calls this structure a wave guide for magnetic monopoles, I call it just a good conductor for magnetic monopoles.

It’s probably important to pause at this point and say that the gravity that Milewski is talking about is not necessarily the same thing as the way the Cs use “gravity” (although I may be wrong about that). The Cs often refer to gravity as “the binder” which seems to imply that it is a medium that carries radiation (waveforms) (although it’s described as “the foundational field from which all other fields emanate” [9/19/98]).

Another couple of researchers who might be interesting to look at are Milo Wolff and Gabriel LaFreniere, both of whom have developed what you might call waveform models of particles. Here are a couple of summaries from Wolff’s site:

http://www.quantummatter.com/space-resonance/what-is-it/

The physical structure of the charged particles involves inward and outward spherical quantum waves. At the center, spherical rotation changes in-waves to out-waves. {“all in creation is just that: a radiating wave” [12/10/94]} The simplest resonance is the electron whose mathematical physical structure is exactly known. Electron waves (comprising all charged particles) extend to infinity serving as the 'communicator' of the natural laws. In contrast, the hadrons exist in a closed, high-density region of high-frequency waves analogous to waves inside a drum or a hollow sphere. No one is sure. It is thought that the many modes of possible vibration in the closed space correspond to the many types of hadron particles. All the qualitative properties point to this conclusion. But no mathematical solutions of these 3D wave modes have been investigated. Mathematicians, please rise to the challenge!

The Spherical Wave Concept of Matter solves Quantum Theory Enigmas

Four thousand years ago, Democritis created the point particle of mass to represent the fundamental elements of matter. This concept was satisfactory until about 1900 when quantum properties of matter were found. Then, puzzles, problems, and paradoxes appeared because most properties of matter derive from the wave structure of particles. Democritis couldn't know this and until recently few persons challenged his embedded concept. Nevertheless, Schrödinger, deBroglie, Dirac, and Einstein, the founders of quantum theory, preferred a wave structure of matter, and in the last decades researchers have validated their intuition.

The Space Resonance concept – matter structured of spherical wave centers – avoids and explains the paradoxes and problems of point particles. In hindsight it is simple; since mass and charge substances do not exist in nature, removing them from particle structure also removes their problems. In their place, the wave centers possess the properties of mass and charge which we observe in a human-sized laboratory, but without the problems of finding mass points which do not exist! One of the fascinating puzzles explained below by this new structure is the former mystery – the spin of the electron! The overwhelming proof of the Wave Structure of Matter is the discovery that all the former empirical natural laws originate from the wave structure. The probability of a coincidence is infinitesimally small. […] The origin of the natural laws are basically concerned with the behavior and forces between two particles. Using Democritis' static particle model, there was no way to understand how forces, locations, or directions could be communicated between the particles. Now the inward and outward spherical waves of the two particles provide that information continuously. […] The relationships between particles and the entire Universe are interacting with each other through their inward and outward waves. Thus they become joined into one ensemble of waves which determines the behavior of the individual particles. The simplest example is Mach's Principle, which proposed (1890) that all the matter of the Universe determines the Law of Inertia.

http://www.quantummatter.com/space-resonance/the-origin-of-instantaneous-action-in-natural-laws/

1. Instantaneous Action is Misunderstood.

Causality is not actually being violated in the puzzling events termed ‘Instantaneous Action’. Instead, the strange events are merely appearances. They were created by our incomplete knowledge of the Wave Structure of Matter and of the energy exchange mechanism. Actually, all energy and information transfer is at […] the speed of light. The cause of these events lies in the wave structure of the charged particles and the universal quantum wave medium. The Wave Structure of Matter is itself a new exciting forefront of science which displays the inter-dependence of all matter in the universe and restores some of the original adventurous spirit of natural philosophy.

2. An Inter-dependent Universe.

The most extraordinary conclusion is that the laws of physics and the structure of matter ultimately depend upon waves established by the matter itself. Every particle communicates its wave state with all other matter so that energy exchange and the laws of physics are properties of the entire ensemble. Mach's Principle is just one of a family of inter-dependent principles.

3. Two Views of our Universe.

Depending upon whether we observe with our human senses or with laboratory quantum-logic, we see different worlds. One world that we see with five senses is our familiar 3D environment governed by the natural laws. Electromagnetic energy exchanges stimulate our senses to form mental images of this world. These images create our sense of human reality. This is termed the "Energy World" since energy-exchange allows us to observe it.

The "Quantum World," composed of unseen quantum waves which form the structure of the fundamental particles (electrons, protons, neutrons), can only been seen with laboratory instruments. We cannot observe these waves directly although they fill the empty space around us. We know of their existence when two particles change their quantized wave states (energy levels), and one of the two particles is in a human sense organ. Quantum waves and the quantum wave medium are the hidden fountainheads of both worlds.

4. Theories of Everything.

There is a story about a Newtonian physicist who challenged the idea that the Earth was supported on Atlas's shoulders. He asked, "What is Atlas standing on?" The reply, "On a turtle". "And what is the turtle standing on?" "On another turtle." It was turtles all the way down. The physicist scoffed and thought he had won the argument.

Have we finally found the theory of everything? In my opinion the search has no end. True, wave-structure has identified length, time, and mass. It explains the origins of the laws, resolves the wave-particle duality and other paradoxes, and provides a new tool for science. This might convince us that we finally understand everything. But do we? Inevitably a new question pops up: "How do the properties and structure of the quantum wave medium arise?" This new question is created by the old question which we thought we had so cleverly explained. Again it is, "Turtles all the way down." The next frontier is to learn and understand the quantum wave medium.

And a couple from LaFreniere’s:

http://web.archive.org/web/20110822035032/http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm

JUST WAVES

Matter is made of waves. Nothing else exists but the aether.

RIPPLES ON WATER

One may produce ripples on water by throwing a pebble into the calm waters of a lake. This produces outgoing waves. One may also produce ingoing waves by means of a large hoop. They culminate at the center and then become outgoing waves. So they must meet ingoing waves. However, unlike waves on a flat surface, this moving standing wave system rather extends in a three-dimensional space. It is made out of spherical waves. […] This wave shows all of the electron's properties. Everything indicates that it actually is an electron.

[…] This wave contains energy. When immobile, this energy is constant, which explains quanta. Otherwise, its energy increases according to the gamma factor: this was predicted by Lorentz. Moreover, this wave can move. Its speed and direction do not normally change, which explains Newton's inertia. But they can change because of the radiation pressure. This leads to mechanical properties exerted from a distance. This wave also exhibits a spin as a result of its phase rotation.

[…]This site shows that it is rather matter which is solely made out of electrons.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110829122224/http://www.glafreniere.com/sa_magnetic.htm

MAGNETIC FIELDS

Magnetic poles are emitters or receivers.

According to the wave mechanics, waves traveling in the same direction add constructively or destructively, but they never produce standing waves. On the contrary waves traveling in opposite direction never cancel; they always produce standing waves. If the particle position is inverted, two bipolar one-way systems […] produce more on-axis standing waves systems between them, hence a secondary magnetic field of force. On the contrary, two identical systems will not produce any field of force. This explains magnetic north and south poles. The field of force is amplified by aether waves. The resulting energy is radiated only along the axis because Huygens' wavelets are out of phase for any transverse direction in accordance with the Huygens Principle. As a consequence, any magnetic system emitting waves toward another symmetrical system will push it because of the radiation pressure. However, two opposite poles (north vs. south or inversely) rather produce an attraction effect.
Two shifted sets of hyperboloids produce the well known magnetic lines of force.

Two concentric spherical wave systems produce interferences on hyperboloids and concentric ellipsoids. Magnetic fields appear to be a rather complex phenomena, but they can still be explained by spherical standing waves. What's more, both electrons and protons must be present and traveling properties for magnetic fields are definitely ruled out. This means that the light and radio waves cannot be made of magnetic (and electric) fields traveling at the speed of light.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110808224313/http://glafreniere.com/sa_gravity.htm

GRAVITY

The plano-convex field of force.

Matter is made of waves and it radiates waves all around. Because the universe is filled up with enormous quantities of matter, the replenishment or amplification process transforms plane waves incoming from very distant matter all around into outgoing spherical waves whose energy is equal. Additionally, waves radiated by matter create standing waves because of all incoming plane waves. The result is an unusual standing wave set which may be called a plano-convex field of force.

The biconvex field of force.

Between two material bodies, however, waves are spherical on both sides. The result is a biconvex field of force.

Inertia.

Galileo showed that any moving body should go on moving as long a no action or friction causes it to decelerate. He called this phenomenon "inertia" and the principle was more formally worded later as Newton's first law. However, Newton was not aware that matter is constantly surrounded with equally distributed and powerful plano-convex fields of force. The final result remains inertia anyway because all actions cancel as long as they are equal.

The shade effect and the radiation pressure.

All forces are the result of a difference between the radiation pressure and the shade effect. The attraction effect between two material bodies may be the result of a higher radiation pressure from opposite sides. However, in the case of gravity, it is rather caused by a lower radiation pressure between them.

The final disequilibria.

Because matter extracts some energy from plane aether waves, there is a shade effect between two material bodies. This causes the intermediate plano-convex fields to be weaker than the external ones. […] Then the extracted energy is totally radiated again into spherical waves […]

For example, the sun intercepts a little amount of energy from aether waves. This produces a shade effect, which is an attractive force. Then the sun radiates the exact amount of energy as spherical wavelets which create plano-convex fields all around including the intermediate shaded space, where they are weaker because of the weaker plane waves. The same radiated waves also create additional biconvex fields of force because they encounter opposite spherical waves. Such fields are truly weaker for a given quantity of energy and they cannot cancel exactly the attractive force. It turns out that inside the intermediate shaded space, the sum of both plano-convex and biconvex gravitational fields of force cannot achieve equilibrium any more. The important point is that biconvex fields of force are weaker than plano-convex ones. Even though the wave energy involved is the same, the radiation pressure is not.

It should be emphasized that the difference is very small. Gravity is not the "fundamental force of the Universe". It is only a residual force, quite insignificant as compared to the sum of transferred energy from incoming to outgoing waves by one kilogram of matter during one second, which is far greater then Einstein's mc squared. […] There is no General Relativity because gravity rarely involves "relativistic" speed. Gravity is just a regular force, quite similar to all other forces. Surely, gravity cannot "bend space". It is geometrically impossible. This hypothesis is totally absurd, actually an insult to our intelligence. What's more, it does not mechanically explain anything.

Note that LaFreniere is also describing a form of of “push” gravity, and what he says about hyperboloids and magnetism. As far as their theory of electrons, see the following:

8/3/96 said:
Q: […] (L) Is gravity emitted by an electron?
A: Yes.

8/22/98 said:
A: Gravitons are really electrons within a time vacuum.

Feynman said that positrons could be “electrons moving backward in time, which suggests that an electron in a “time vacuum” may be an electron without spin? Maybe a monad?

In any case, one main point I’m getting at is that magnetism might be a higher-density form of the EM spectrum:

11/16/94 said:
Q: (L) When light is transferred to electrical energy, does it actually change density?
A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is it from 1st to 3rd when it becomes electricity?
A: Yes.

If LaPoint’s observations are valid, they could be describing something important about the architecture of reality – specifically about the make-up of spherical, rotating bodies at all levels, but also intersecting with things like gravity (it may also be complementary to a lot of the Electric Universe theory) and quantum theory. There's a question of the validity of the work of Milewski, Wolff, and LaFreniere as well. So if anyone sees any holes in the physics, math, or cosmology involved, please speak up!
 
Shijing said:
...you can’t have a particle of matter unless magnetic fields are there to form and confine it... they’re candidates for the strong force in atoms...

If by "magnetic field", he means something like "aether field" (Ark's conformal group math) then I could agree for a fundamental matter particle (electron/quark) where the "confinement" would be black-hole-like but personally I prefer something Kaluza-Klein extra dimensions for the strong and weak forces. EM would be Kaluza-Klein too (Ark's conformal group has Kaluza-Klein-like extra dimensions).

Q: Are you supposed to generate magnetism, or is it natural magnetism?
A: Natural.

A: […] Off the point we told you before that all spheres of cosmic nature are windows.

Maybe it's that gravity opening up with magnetic field changes thing. You go from Minkowski metric gravity to a conformal "graviphoton aether" metric.

One is an idea that’s been elaborated on by John Milewski, in which he postulates a form of radiation called “magenetic-electricity” or “magnetricity” (he calls it "superlight", which basically means "superluminal light") which is supposed to be the converse of electromagnetism. He derives this by plugging negative numbers into Maxwell’s equations (I’ll have to ask the mathematicians here if that’s “legal” or not). One part of his hypothesis is that gravity (in conventional terms) is a “push” force, not an attractive force.

Well the conformal group/aether math is the maximal symmetry group for Maxwell's equations. It would include longitudinal superluminal photons. It's more graviphoton than magnetricity. You kind of get imaginary numbers for spacetime via the conformal group which I think relates to concepts like negative energy for black hole stuff but I'm not overly sure what plugging negative numbers in to Maxwell's equations means. The conformal group would include antigravity but its subgroup is conventional attractive gravity. It's antigravity in a dark energy-like sense.

It’s probably important to pause at this point and say that the gravity that Milewski is talking about is not necessarily the same thing as the way the Cs use “gravity” (although I may be wrong about that). The Cs often refer to gravity as “the binder” which seems to imply that it is a medium that carries radiation (waveforms) (although it’s described as “the foundational field from which all other fields emanate” [9/19/98]).

The Cs are likely talking about gravity as "all" including conventional gravity; upgrading to aether/conformal/superluminal; Kaluza-Kleining it into EM/nuclear forces; or looking at its fundamental information theory origins. It is all binder-like in that they sit on links in lattice spacetime models.

It is thought that the many modes of possible vibration in the closed space correspond to the many types of hadron particles... Thus they become joined into one ensemble of waves which determines the behavior of the individual particles. The simplest example is Mach's Principle, which proposed (1890) that all the matter of the Universe determines the Law of Inertia.... Causality is not actually being violated in the puzzling events termed ‘Instantaneous Action’. Instead, the strange events are merely appearances. They were created by our incomplete knowledge of the Wave Structure of Matter and of the energy exchange mechanism.... The most extraordinary conclusion is that the laws of physics and the structure of matter ultimately depend upon waves established by the matter itself. Every particle communicates its wave state with all other matter so that energy exchange and the laws of physics are properties of the entire ensemble. Mach's Principle is just one of a family of inter-dependent principles.

Mach's principle and conformal symmetry are related (that's a Julian Barbour Platonia thing). Basically all information pre-exists.

8/3/96
Q: […] (L) Is gravity emitted by an electron?
A: Yes.

8/22/98
A: Gravitons are really electrons within a time vacuum.

Feynman said that positrons could be “electrons moving backward in time, which suggests that an electron in a “time vacuum” may be an electron without spin? Maybe a monad?

In any case, one main point I’m getting at is that magnetism might be a higher-density form of the EM spectrum:

11/16/94
Q: (L) When light is transferred to electrical energy, does it actually change density?
A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is it from 1st to 3rd when it becomes electricity?
A: Yes.

Magnetism and electricity are kind of relativity duals of each other (they both look like each other from another reference frame or something like that). The real upgrade is to aether/conformal/Mach/etc. where particle information can get combined into superparticles (brains). It's kind of electrons on vertices with gravitons on vacuum links in between them and conformal graviphotons shepherding bunches to the same world of the many worlds within the pre-existing Clifford Algebra Platonia information space.
 
Just for clarification, do you mean branes or brains?

If it is "brains", where can I find the definition please?
 
dant said:
Just for clarification, do you mean branes or brains?

If it is "brains", where can I find the definition please?

What I had in mind with "brains" is the possible role of conformal graviphotons in binding electrons together in quantum consciousness models (1st to 3rd density). One of Ark's conformal gravity papers had quantum states shown inside of a unit disk. Conformal seems to link classical and quantum. Being quantum, branes could apply too especially with the idea of gravitons/graviphotons binding between vertices of many-worlds spacetime lattices.

http://www.tony5m17h.net/QuanConResonance.html#resonance
 
Back
Top Bottom