ROTATIONAL MAGNETIC FORCE

CHAPTER 83                             INDEX TO OTHER PAGES

(Published with General Science Journal May 25 2015)

  1. Throughout the years and in all textbooks electricity is claimed to be a flow of electrons. The experimental evidence presented here shows this to be unfounded, along with a description of what electricity really is, and how the facts of nature confirm these findings.

INTRODUCTION

  1. Rotational magnetic force is the proper term for what is otherwise known as electricity. This fact of nature however was not discovered, but in my young age was revealed unto me as if I had always known it. 

  2. Nor can I recollect at any time not to have known it, but it was not until more than fifty years later (just recently) that I thought of a way to prove that which I knew so well, how magnetic force is one and the same in all that is found to display its directionally conductive nature.  

  3. Along with it however I was forced to make some astounding revelations in order to present the evidence to my theme.

 ESSAY

  1. To be ‘Directionally Conductive,’ is the proper terminology for what is otherwise known as - to push and to pull, or to attract and repel, a north and a south in magnetic relevant to movement, that is to say; to the ‘Motion’ in movement.  

  2. For that which we call magnetism in all respects is motion, a movement passing by a circle in the format of what is known as the “Figure of Eight.”

  3. This movement that I usually designate by calling it the “3M,” is a conductive movement. Conductive in this that when two magnets are facing one another they will unite to one another, or in the opposite direction of movement to draw away from one another. 

  4. Therefore did I term it; “Directionally Conductive.  For it is not in the substance of these magnets that they may be moved to and fro, as it is by and in the movement of the parts by which any magnet is magnetic.

  5. We are to differentiate between what is material, and what is immaterial. The substance of the magnet is material while its magnetic motion is immaterial, it being the sum of the movements conducted from one minute part to the other linking together conductively.  

  6. Even though I held off for a long while the time has come to make this revelation - that movement is as real as any material part may be real, that movement is an entity all in itself.  And yes this is a revelation to which there is ample evidence.  But us being human bear with me to take this one step at the time.

The figure eight of force

  1. First let us consider a magnetic field and what the pattern thereof is, be it in lines of movement, or in direction of movement.  Our textbooks, as well as man’s understanding of it show it to be two circles joined at a center, with the outgoing flow as North, and the ingoing flow as South.  

  2. The first part of this however is a sight deception, it are not two circles, but a single circle that is twisted over by a half turn by which it comes to resemble the figure of eight.

  3. And it in all respects is a figure eight of force and/or motion. Its movement in the flow thereof completes each single circle by passing in the design of an eight.  In other words; a circle of movement with a point of centering in and upon its own line of movement.  

  4. If then one is wondering what difference it will make to be two separate circles, or an eight that also displays two circles, there is not a world of difference but a whole universe of difference, which could not exist if it were not in an eight.

  5. Nor would we have our tides upon both sides of the earth, or even any tide at all. Gravity with its limited distance out into space (by the data of Hubble’s space telescope some 3300 miles) (Ref 1) has this curious phenomena, that it pulls in a ^downward^ motion, while the rising waters are an ^upwards^ motion.  

  6. Gravity therefore – if anything – restrains the waters rise, and never at all a cause to it.

Tides

  1. But our 3M, the magnetic potential of the earth in its countless many figure eight’s of movement is the perfect cause.  The moon at 72 times as distant as that earth’s gravity will extend outwards - is a magnetic entity just as our earth is, wherefore it also, as all stars and planets have their figure eight of force.  

  2. And like any two magnets join and disjoin, their movement being ‘Directionally Conductive’, to join with one another. 

  3. As therefore the moon for its weight and velocity attempts to steer a straight course away from us, these figure eight’s of force hold it in orbit. But with a strain upon these somewhat flexible figure eight’s of force - in a measure equal to the moon’s mass and velocity.  

  4. This strain is of course found directly between the earth and the moon – that then elongates that half of those figures of eight of force between them – that in turn causes the waters to rise to what is known as the tides.  

  5. For just as a sheet of plastic with water is pulled upwards, the area where the water resides becoming smaller - so the waters are raised to that extend.

  6. To demonstrate this fact of nature place some metal filings around a magnet, and with another magnet representing the moon, pull and move from the first to observe the elongation by the movement of the metal filings.

Dual tides

  1. And what is so unique about a figure eight of force is that when the handles of a pair of scissors is closed in so the cutting edges are closed in.  Accordingly, with the moon pulling on one side of the eight causing a tide under the moon, an equal tide on the opposite side of the earth also takes place. 

  2. All because magnetism is not by two circles, but by an eight - that as such comprises to a single circle.

  3. And why now did I have to explain the tides when our subject is electricity? It is because electricity is as much a magnetic force as the earth and stars are magnets.  

  4. As then our earth and the stars may be rated stationary fields, or linear fields, electricity comes as a rotational magnetic field of force, or angular magnetic field of force. 

  5. Wherefore we are back to our rotational magnetic force, but in order to explain it I had to provide evidence to its design as a figure of eight to which the tides - as one factor – serve me for evidence.

Motion AS AN Entity

  1. How thus shall we proceed from here?  Either to accurately define our rotational magnetic entity, or to show what it is not? For we do have an explanation to the nature of electricity, and that for quite some time already without any improvement, something that I in my younger days came to call - an outright lie.  

  2. Nor have I changed since because in my book, as in anyone’s book – a single sided coin does not exist, nor can it exist.  And yes I am talking about man’s electrons and protons, how these cannot possibly exist. And here is why.

  3. All of nature, in anything and everything shows all phenomena in their dual nature. It is so with man and beast, with light and magnetism, with atoms and molecules, and even with the air we breathe. Always a positive and a negative as no more than a point of view upon a single entity.  

  4. Our earth as a single entity has north and south, an electrical current has a positive and negative side. But it is not that either end is as such positive nor negative, since the whole of the circuit is a single movement with a single direction of rotation.  

  5. As thus both ends are identical the terms applied unto them are in all essence a point of view.

  6. By our illustration Figure 1, at ‘A’, if movement is only outgoing from where does it come forth? Or at ‘B’, with an only incoming movement, from where may it be forthcoming? 

  7. For this is an absolute fact that cannot possible denied nor deliberated, that wherever an arrow is going to – it has a coming from.  At ‘D’, in the illustration that line as an arrow is more real than even the earth or the whole of the universe, for without it, nothing would exists.

  8. And how is that so?  That line represents movement, it represents motion, the very first and most important ingredient whereby all things exist and are constructed. And why does any man even doubt my word when it is not possible for me to lie, and it is utterly against my nature to deceive any man?  

  9. Nor am I pronouncing these words in vain, for consider this: How is it that you are able to read my words? There is a space between your eyes and my words upon the screen, how thus do these come to you? \Unless there was movement from every fraction of these letters they would not be able to refract the specific wavelength of these atomic parts, be it black or any color.  

  10. And unless motion in itself were an entity to always travel at one fixed velocity (300K/km/sec) by which these wavelengths may be transmitted to you from and to your eyes to the screen, nothing at all would be visible.

 

Figure 1. Is to convey how movement in its fundamental scope is an entity all in itself, and that by natural law it has a simultaneous coming and going – always two sides to any coin.  By law therefore neither protons nor electrons can exist.

  1. Thus there is movement, an always-existing movement that passes upon and by every part in nature, a million or so at every millimeter, and also from the parts to make for the long lines of movement.  All because I said that movement is conductive, and not just conductive, but directionally conductive.  

  2. It is the head of that arrow upon that line in figure 1 ‘D’, that represents movement directionally, as in movement cannot ever be movement unless it is going somewhere. Nor therefore can it go somewhere unless is coming from elsewhere.

  3. How thus can a proton be positive, having a going to motion with no coming from? Or an electron with a coming to, but no coming from?  You cannot break an arrow in half to say that its front is positive with its tail-end negative, for in that condition it is no longer an arrow for any use, but to be cast away, as all protons and electrons in due time will be discarded.  

  4. The line with the arrow at ‘D’ may be said to have a north and a south, or a positive and a negative end.  But who is to separate them? Broken in two each end with have its N, and S, or P and N, just as any magnet when broken in halves teaches us this simple fact in nature.

  5. There is thus but one fundamental force in nature, the movement in and upon all things. And since that movement shows itself to be magnetic - and fundamental in this that it is directionally conductive, it moves all things, and is in and upon all things.  

  6. Nor should this come to us as something new since the spectrum, known as the E M spectrum, lists all that moves within it, be it light, radar, electricity, and magnetic itself as the very foundation thereof.

The Atom

  1. What therefore may the atom be when there are no such things as single sided coins (electrons protons)?  Figure 1 section ‘C’ shows it clearly, the figure eight of force in the smallest of all scales. And these as such are most perfectly enabled to join and disjoin with one another. 

  2. Or when looking at the atomic grid of ice for example – how do you think these parts make for such grids with those spacing in between them?  If it were not for the ability to push as well as to push these would not exist.  

  3. Or what of the power in steam, or in gasoline? It are not Martians nor ghosts to push these parts into a distance from one another.  But just as magnets are driven from one another so the power in the cylinders of our four wheeled toys is from and by magnetic.

  4. How for example is steel so strong if not for the multiple magnetic coordinates upon these atoms?  Or our air how is it that we can move through it, and even breathe it? 

  5. If these atoms of Nitrogen and Oxygen were single they would make for a semi solid, like unto mud, and how then are we to move through it so freely?  It is enough for them to be joined with a few atoms of Hydrogen that then turns it into a liquid with far less spacing between them.

electricITY -- (WHAT IT IS NOT) 

  1. But we are drifting away from our prime subject, namely how and why electricity cannot possibly be any flow of parts that in the first place do not exist.  And to prove the same our reference will be to figure 2.

  2. If we take a battery or any electrical source upon which to connect some leads, and we hold a regular magnet with any one of its two poles near the wire, the wire will come to vibrate back and forth to that magnet.

  3. But how is that possible when that electricity is supposedly nothing more than electrons on the move?  For while these are claimed to be single sided coins, to be negative only – these by all means and by natural law should cling to that north end of the magnet.

  4. But no, that magnet will both push and pull on that wire once for each turn of its voltage.

 

Figure 2.  Illustrates the evidence to the fact that electricity is not any flow of negative only parts. It as such without doubt defeats man’s theory about electricity.

  1. Voltage then means the rate of revolutions; at how fast that electric wave formation is turning. Shall then these electrons be positive as well as negative? And how do these electrons come to alternate their so-called polarity at every single turn equal to the voltage of it? 

  2. If two plus two does in fact equal to four, that flow of negative only parts is but a myth. And just as an ambulance cannot pass the vehicles upon a jam-packed freeway with cars parked from border to border or wall-to-wall, so no material part can ever pass through any metal conductor.  

  3. These ideals are mere fantasies concocted by the ignorance of man, the proof of which is right before our eyes with anyone able to certify that evidence to himself.

ELECTRICITY -- (WHAT IT IS)

  1. Perhaps I revealed more than what I should have, if so let us take it in stride, for I too am in this body as a man. But as to the nature of electricity, and the format of its wave I spoke of it many years ago, and came to enhance upon it. (Ref 2)

  2. Ask yourself this question; - what in fact are we doing by turning an armature within a magnetic field?  We first of all establish a strong magnetic field, a stationary field, as also a linear field, a flow of magnetic passing in straight lines through that armature.  

  3. That conductor then in its multiple turns serves as a guide upon which we - by our rotation - are twisting these normally straight lines of magnetic into a circular format that in all essence results into a number of twisted magnetic lines of movement.

  4. This may be envisioned as when a rubber band is twisted - the format of which becomes likes figures of eight end on end. For when any two or more straight lines of magnetic are twisted around one another - that twist came about by the rotational movement within which a suitable guide was placed to contain these ever moving twists. 

  5. Our copper, or like metals, are suitable to conduct a magnetic field, but not retain it as the metals of magnets do, for which cause these act like a guide only for the twisted rotating lines of magnetic force.

  6. Electricity as such is nothing more, nor anything less than a magnetic field, a rotating magnetic field, in a format that is akin to its stationary cousin, namely; the normal linear magnetic field as observed in magnets.  

  7. Regular magnets display a stationary field, the format of which is a single circle twisted over by a half wave formation that not only appears – but is a figure eight of force.

  8. And so why is there a magnetic field around a conductor if not because the current itself is magnetic?   And why does that flow of magnetic move in a circle – if not because that force of magnetic is rotating, being a rotational magnetic force?

  9. Then to the illustration figure 3, the pattern of the electric wave, is the magnetic pattern, simply because it are magnetic lines of movement that by our rotation have become twisted in a continual series of crossing-over, the familiar figures of eight.  

  10. At every other loop therefore where the movement is in like direction - the areas where the arrows point upwards, is the center of any one figure of eight with a north and a south. (North to the arrow head, south at its bottom end)

  11. While at the points noted ‘Y’, there is an equal crossing with the movement in just the opposite direction that are not designated as having the power in eight since these are the east and west areas where the direction of movement returns as it is found with any singular magnet, or figure of eight.  

  12. Yet these areas join with one another since there is a like direction of the one from the top to the bottom of its adjacent one, remembering how movement is directionally conductive.

  13. The movement of this string is thus always in two directions, the twisted line of one in one direction, with the twisted line of the other in the opposite direction.  

  14. This of course is absolutely logical since within our generator located at point ‘X’, our guide (the wire) is laid forth in a circle wherefore at any moment when the direction of movement on the one side of the armature points to the right, the direction of movement on the other side of that armature is to the left, making for a single direction of movement. 

  15. Any straight line of movement – when it is turned into a loop will of course by its view-point seem to move in two directions. 

  16. We however having knowledge should know the difference, how these two directions are in effect but a single direction, and as such in twisting them over come to this familiar pattern, the pattern of magnetic.

 

Figure 3. Illustrates the wave-like formation, or coordinate as it is better called of electricity, nature’s rotational magnetic force.

  1. When therefore we place a magnet at K, the wire conductor in that position of its rotation will push itself away from that magnet, while at N it will be pulled towards it.  That is how and why any electrical conductor will come to move to and fro before any stationary linear magnet. 

  2. And it should come for some good knowledge unto us how and why when we feed an electrical current through a tungsten wire in a light-bulb that by it the atoms of that tungsten atom come to be so exited whereby to produce the wavelengths of light.  For the atoms of the tungsten are magnets all the same, just as any atom is essentially a magnet.

  3. When we attempt to electrify a plastic bar, the atoms of that plastic look at that electricity and conclude that we do not have any kind of pattern by which you may be conducted.  If instead we apply the electrical coordinate to a copper bar, it readily passes since the coordinates of that copper are well suited to conduct that electrical pattern. 

  4. When however we apply it to tungsten or to Nicromium the coordinates of these metals are somewhere in between, for yes - they will conduct the electric wave, but with some difficulty.  That is how we toast our bread, and light our homes.

Punch line

  1. And now for the punch line in how that is so, the answer for which is in direction and positioning, along with the nature of magnetic being directionally conductive. 

  2. When and if the polarities – in their coordinates - of the atoms of any one element are directly like illustrated by figure 3, the electricity is going to push pull on these atoms whereby they are moved (exited), resonating and speeding up their internal movement, that for Nicromium in our toasters comes to be red hot, producing no more than a low variation of the longer wavelengths. (The red)

  3. Upon the tungsten however neatly guarded by an inert gas, their magnetic play of push and pull can come much higher to produce all wavelengths from red to blue, and even longer than the red to warm the areas around them.

  4. And so you see it is all in conductivity, and that by direction of powered by but a single entity known as 3M, the motion of motion with a single constant rate of velocity into any and all directions by which anything may come upon it.

  5. This is the flow of movement and power known as magnetic, the reality of magnetism by and in which the whole of the universe is held in check.

  6. I now in the course my teaching may on occasion use a figure of speech, such as where I may have said; “The flow of electricity.” Since in fact electricity never flows, it never moves down the line upon the conductor, the only real linear movement upon the wire is the format itself, extending itself at the speed like unto light, the velocity of which is a constant 300.000 km/sec. 

  7. Then from this constant we are to compensate for the angular moments in the line that now has become a wavy line that for distance in time comes to be proportionally less.

  8. The voltage of a current is its moment of rotation, while ampere translates into ‘quell’.  Our notion is that when in use the electricity moves down the conductor. This however is not so, the only thing that moves along the conductor is its format, and that of course only at the instant when the circuit is completed, after which nothing at all moves down the line. 

  9. That so-called flow of current thus remains at all times in place rotating according to the rpm at which it is produced.

  10. To therefore explain ampere, at a light load it is like a light vehicle moving upon a blacktop road, leaving no tracks nor heating up the road. But with a heavy load it is like a pressing down upon the road with a heavy vehicle heating up the pavement. 

  11. This is what I mean by – to quell, for the electricity is both in and around the conductor utilizing the very coordinates of that metal upon which its extends its own coordinate, the typical twist or series of eight end on end, that as such is properly called ‘a coordinate’ in preference to calling it a wave. 

  12. The power of electricity thus is – its magnetic potential in eight remaining in place, with the flow of electricity long gone since in the first second already it can extend itself seven times around the whole earth.

  13. The movement down the line of electricity is thus by the same 3M movement whereby light travels, and whereby the earth, the stars, and any standard magnet completes their figures of eight.

  14. Why thus does electricity travel at the speed of light? Because it is no more than a coordinate of movement which is found to travel with its power remaining in place. 

  15. Motion as that motion which is fundamental in nature (3M) – and classified as an entity in itself – is in and by and through all things empowering light as well as all waves inclusive the linear and angular magnetic waves, linear in magnets, rotational in electricity.

Conclusion

  1. Since this simple experimental evidence conclusively ranks man’s theories regarding electricity as well as his electrons unfounded and void with the truth clearly shown, all of his sciences will have to be rewritten. 

  2. But the question remains if man will consent to acknowledge his errors, or continue to live by his erroneous conceptions. I however have my doubts that this current generation with its scientists and physicists will see this article as one of the greatest strides forward in the fundamentals of the sciences.

 Myself

  1. I now did not explain the above as if I just discovered it by some experiment, since I have known what electricity really is for more than half a century as a young man because the Almighty Creator of that electricity revealed it to me, along with many other secrets in the fundamentals of nature, inclusive the foundations of the earth upon which it rests.

  1. Here is another illustration of the electrical format, the direction of movement is always in two directions.  The pattern as such moves only in the circular, its RPM, not in the linear, while the 3M (magnetic motion) moves in both directions at the speed of light, the coordinate (pattern) thus extends itself at the speed of light.

  2. Any draw upon that current then quells upon the wave guide (conductor).

INCONCLUSIVE

  1. It has been reported that Thomas Edison was the business man with Tesla the real inventor. In the movie about Tesla and named Tesla, he comes out as the weirdo, and a dreamer living with fantasies.

  2. It credits Tesla as the inventor of AC current, while Thomas Edison considers AC current a fantasy and worked against Tesla. But this is a crock, since Edison had already many power stations all of them generating AC current, that by the use of a commutator was then converted to DC current.

  3. If anything in that movie is to be believed, with Edison adamant about keeping DC current, and Tesla not having the brains to tell Edison that he is in fact himself generating AC current - it is obvious how neither Edison nor Tesla understood the principle of their devices.

  4. No one to this date has ever built a DC generator, since all generators always generate electricity on the alternating basis, that then with the use of a commutator or diodes is converted to DC.

  5. AC verses DC, is simply to rotate by a single direction, or to rotate by continually reversing the direction of rotation. And since the armature turns within a single direction of magnetic flux, it for its up and down direction by which its enters upon that flux can only form a continually reversing direction of electrical rotation.

  6. Tesla therefore cannot very well been the inventor of AC current, since by then it was widely in use, He simply omitted the commutator from Edison’s generators.

  7. How thus these people that were supposed to be inventors had such a childish notion and understanding of what we see as plain common sense.  If then this not be so, then the producers of that forenamed movie are libelous and cheats as well as liars.

LIGHT'S RECAPTURING

  1. If we take a red laser beam the wavelength of which would be 700nm, and we direct it at an orbiting satellite that wavelength would expand as it goes. It may very well be 1200nm long when it is reflected from that satellite back to earth.

  2. A wavelength of 1200nm now is not red in color, and yet when it arrives back to us at earth we behold it for red, simply because just as it expanded passing upon a lighter media, it again contracted itself coming back into the denser media.

  3. And so how long would the length of a wave that is 700nm (red) here on earth at sea level be in outer space?  For it is a confirmed fact that our space vehicles do not encounter any real resistance when they are 200 miles or more above the earth, whereas coming down below some 80 miles  friction starts in.

  4. Our best presumption for this is called density, how at the lower levels the media is more dense. The question then becomes -just how much difference there is from 80 miles to some 300 miles in what we call free space?  If we go by the established index of retardation of 1 to 0.0003 it would mark space to be nearly as dense as our air.

  5. The satellites alone then proved that to be otherwise. And if we go by my calculations on a previous page finding a density by its reduction in wavelength it comes to about a quarter still leaving space to be occupied by a density equal to three quarters of our air.

  6. In my view this is still not the answer, not an answer somewhere near to reality. But what is the reality for the density of space?  As man has it - to be totally devoid of substance - is also incorrect, the true answer lies somewhere in between.

  7. If we employ mathematics to for the example take a wavelength that is 700nm on earth the velocity of which is 90km/sec less than it was in space, how long would that wave have to be in space?

  8. Utilizing our 4.84A circumference, 7000A plus 4.84A is 7004.84A, and that into the constant of 300.000 comes to a velocity of 299.792 km/s. when therefore we add the 90 km/s to it, the space velocity for that wavelength would be 299.882 km/s.

  9. But at what wavelength would that red color wave on earth travel in space at that increase in velocity? Utilizing the inverse calculation that would then come to a wavelength of 12.400A. And to confirm the same 300.000 divided by 12.404.84 - times 12.400 is 299.882 km/s. 

  10. The wave thus for its 90 km/s increase expanded by some 5400A. Or by the same token it blue shifted by 5400A when arriving at the sea level density of our air. 

  11. That 5400 thus accounts for no more than 90km/s, whereas a 7000A length arriving at our air by its 90km/s reduction in velocity came to a reduction of only 2120A. And to confirm the same; 300.000 : 4884.84 times 4880 is 299.702 km/s.

  12. If then we compare this with the shorter ones like the 4000A that at sea level travels at the velocity of (300.000 : 4004.84 times 4000) is 299.637 km/s. Then adding 90 comes to 299.727 km/s. What therefore is the wavelength to travel by that velocity?

  13. This is by a 5330A wavelength, 300.000 : 5334.84 times 5330 is 299.727 km/s.  The difference here is 1330A in the expansion, and or blue shift of that wavelength.  By comparison the 7000A wave expanded by 5400A while the 4000A wave expanded only 1330A for the same 90 km/s change in velocity.

  14. The reason for the difference in the expansion by an equal change in velocity is for the way in which light-waves are brought about, or as we might say, generated or instigated. When you are standing next to a moving belt and you are throwing coins at that belt, you would do so in a manner straight before you.

  15. This may be illustrated by Figure 83-5 from your hand to point A straight on. But now consider how there is a strong wind from direction M, as therefore you toss the coins the wind may push them out of your recti-linear movement in a direction that angles towards point B.

  1. If you are forceful tossing them at high speed you will have them fall upon the belt at point A, but if you act slowly reducing the speed at which the coins leave your hand towards the belt the wind at M will have its moment to pose a more angular movement to it arriving more towards B at the belt.

  2. So it is when light is generated, the actions of the media, atoms, molecules and greater formations drive a right or left angle - so called - indent, that then is taken away by the always moving belt, nature's 3M.  This was previously illustrated on page 80  utilizing illustration Figure 80-8. the Protractor. 

  3. This is how and why any and all waves are transposed by a circular path, wherefore in the calculations for its velocity we are to utilize the diameter by its circumference.

  4. This so called speed of light in space and any media in our debate is of course no more than simply thinking out loud. The facts that we have are rather vague, for we have no absolute confirmation just how dense the areas of space are.

  5. But this fact remains that light travels with a velocity proportional to its wavelength. As therefore it is so in any media we cannot and may not exclude space. It is a grave error to presume that light in space will violate all its laws of motion.

  6. If therefore we are to jot down a velocity it must be by a wavelength, and no other way, for that is the law of light by its own dictates. Since then in all known media the velocity and wavelength are susceptible to the density of that media, so it must be in space.

  7. And yes I am questioning man's so called space velocity, as well as his index to retardation like in air for a 90km/s difference. If per example the speed of light in space were 299.930 km/s, which is 130 km/s faster than our current setting, and we take that to the index of 0.0003 the result is 90 km/s

  8. As then our current slower velocity of 299.792 km/s to the same index also comes out at 90 km/sec, what is the difference? For while the reduction is the same the speed in both media's are quite different.

  9. But we have yet to look at the lengths of those waves that (as also previously shown) are never at all proportional to the index of retardation.  A velocity of light traveling 299.972km/s in our air, comes to 700nm. while in space at 299.930km/s the length of the wave is 2100nm, 3 times as long.

  10. If then the speed of light in air is indeed 299.702km/s it does not compute to a 90km/s reduction but 228km/s reduction. And the index proportional to that would have to be 0.01084.

  11. In this case the density of space is reduced by two/thirds, all of 66%, which is more believable than our previous assumptions. Here, if we assume the atoms in our air at a spacing of 10A, there would be 700 for each single wavelet.

  12. The greater spacing in space then would come to 30A. 30 in 21.000 is then again 700 making it appear how this particular wavelet keeps itself to 700 atoms in space as well as in air, contracting and/or expanding its length accordingly.

  13. All this is of course but thinking out loud seeing we have no confirmation.  And how shall we obtain that which is ever so difficult to obtain.  One thing that we do have by confirmation is that light's velocity is proportional to its computed length in any and all densities, whereby these change accordingly.

  14. Our space velocity of 299.792 km/s is therefore but a hoax since it fails to specify the wavelength, and as such violates the laws pertaining to the wave movement of the spectrum.

  15. If we assume the velocity of 299.792km/s for the length of 7000A, the space velocity of the 6000A wave is 299.758km/s. And for the 5000A it is 299.709km/s, with 4000A at 299.637km/s.

  16. Across the board there are 792, 758, 709, and 637. The average of which is 299.724km/s, while the 5500A wave travels at 299.736km/s.  All this is simply something for us to think about.

  17. What all is within the Universe - God only knows having created it by the power of His Word alone. Our knowledge is no more than what we see on the images that have been taken. The rest however beautiful will remain a mystery.

  18. We can speculate, yes, but let us maintain it it as speculation.

WHAT LIGHT IS - IS NOT

  1. We have the notion that the waves from 400 nm to 700 nm is light, but that shall hardly be so. That which we call light is nothing more than mechanical variations, angular moments brought upon a line of movement.

  2. The true nature of light is a faculty of our spirit. We in all essence interpret mechanical variations into vision. Note thus how I did not say - into light, but into vision. And that vision comes to us as light.

  3. From the angle of an angular moment we interpret the surface of things. Light as such thus is within us by interpretation, a movement into movement, and that by movement.

THINKING OUT LOUD

  1. But now again thinking out loud, how is it possible for any person not to realize the things that I have spoken of?   I endeavored  in all my wording to be as simple as possible with as much logic and common sense as I could muster. 

  2. In all things I have been as plain as I could be utilizing the facts of nature as they are to all men,  How therefore can any man not understand these facts as they are so plainly laid out before him?

  3. Like for example how some claim to have a galaxy moving a thousand times faster than it really is?  Is simple mathematics beyond their cunning?  When they have 4 apples in hand - they have the nerve to acclaim that it are ten apples?.

  4. This does not make any sense, wherefore my observation must be that all these men are without sense and devoid of it.  Acclaiming that nothing can move faster than the speed of light at 300.000 km/sec, and yet have the gall to acclaim that it traveled faster.  

  5. How contradictory man is in just about all that he does, especially those so called scientists in the fundamentals of things.

  6. And this thing where without a shadow of doubt I showed them how their concoction of electricity as a flow of electrons by all means has to be a lie demonstrated by any magnet. How with these facts so clearly laid out before them, and shown unto them do they become speechless with not a sound to be heard?    

  7. Are they so much devoid of integrity?  Are they altogether irrational?   I cannot comprehend such lack of integrity, such ill will in man. I know that man is that way, seeing how he shows himself that way, but do not ask me to understand it.

  8. To me evil is as the Lord said; "Inscrutable", it cannot be understood. Man has not harmed himself by any small means in not coming with an answer at my request, and on account of it, I determined to sell them out, causing them to bend the knee.  

  9. If then in their pride they may not wish to bend their knees, likens or no likens they will be bend, and they will be humbled.

  10. When I called they refused to answer. When I spoke they were left speechless, when I presented them with the facts undeniable before them they did not even breathe a whisper.  Therefore O you people far and wide you will be sold like slaves before a master, your souls as well your hides will at the block.

  11. The Lord at one point said:  "When I called you did not answer, therefore now I will give you over to the slaughter.And what have I said regarding them in not having any answer at my calling?

  12. No it is not new to me that man would be altogether without integrity, since it was so prophesied - that at our calling they would have no answer, like my Lord said, "A delusion," so He judged the men of this generation, a delusion, something that is without substance.

  13. It is written: "Because I have called and you refused to listen, have stretched out my hand and no one has heeded, and you have ignored all my counsel and would have none of my reproof, I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when panic strikes you, when panic strikes you like a storm, and your calamity comes like a whirlwind, when distress and anguish come upon you. "

  14. And "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deed were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed."

CORRESPONDENCE

Usually I receive no reply to my essays, most people do not know how to reply, because as the Lord said; "They are a delusion." And from such it was that I received criticism, only because I am generally kind and humble in my writings.

The person I am replying to may not wish his remarks to be published, nor be known wherefore I will enter only my reply to him.

Dear Mr. ......

  1. Obviously you have not understood that which I proved so well in that essay. Nor are you well versed in man’s physics.  Your claim - that it is the motion of a charge of those electrons - is not the issue! - Is it?  And is not my claim also for movement?

  2. But all this is besides the point, the point being that man in his ignorance and in his conceit claims those parts or charges to be only negative (Something that cannot and does not exist seeing how it violates all the laws of nature) Nor am I a pupil but rather a teacher of teachers, my degree in physics exceeds that of all men.

  3. Since then any magnet all in itself proves man’s fantasy to be a hoax, or rather an outright lie, - be it so called electrons, or charges, or motion, or movement these are as much positive in nature as well as negative, which is the law of nature in anything and everything.  

  4. Any man that cannot see this for the truth of it, is most certainly blind, and/or dulled by the venom of man’s so called physics teachers.

  5. Man observes the sky how the solar system is built, and he fantasizes his atom after a like fashion, all because by man fantasies are preferred above any truth. He invents one-sided coins (protons and electrons) but never at all has the courtesy nor the know-how to prove nor to produce one. 

  6. What single person in the world now would believe in one-sided coins as if in anywise at all these could exist? There are many of them, all those that are brainwashed by the fantasies of the teachers in the sciences, all those bitten by serpents.

  7. Man is completely without excuse even to have held on to his fantasies regarding electricity and magnetism to this very day, seeing how the evidence to the contrary has been before him for more than a century.

  8. Therefore do I acclaim man’s version an outright abominable lie - that usually proceeds from the most ignorant among them.  Nor is it wise to take one’s lessons from the blind, but rather as I did from the very Maker of that electricity.

  9. And so I say again, no man has an excuse not to realize the words I have spoken since along with them I presented the absolute proof of them.

  10. It would do you well to believe upon my word, lest along with all the rest of those that do not believe upon my word and the evidence presented, will soon become known as the fools among man.

Leonard.

  Next page