Entry

Newton's third law of motion and vortices.
The problem with a vprtex as popularly thought of is the same as the problem with the electron/ They are both all Yin with no Yang. The action and reaction principle of Newton declares Yin and its complement Yang must be everywhere in every situation. Newtons method of fluents proposed everything to be in motion. Therefore rest is relative to a balancing principle, a balancing action. Newton did not expect these balancing systems to be simple, but in the main they were mechanically perceivable if complex. In the case of action at a distance however, both magnetic and celestial, sometimes called gravitational, he had no clue how this principle applied
itself, but trusting to it he placed centripetal force against centrifugal force, clockwise rotation against anticlockwise and tangential force to the circle opposed by an opposite tangential force, In this way he could quantify and describe the most arbitrary motions. The issue was instantaneity.

In his lab he could examine how matter transmitted these forces but did not understand how precisely. How were substances held together and yet flexible? The only analogy was the twisted thread of rope or twine, and the fusing of different substances together. His alchemical research led to a deeper understanding about matter, but no real understanding of magnetism and space beyond Gilberts reasonable assertions that this was an active principle of space.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_between_magnets
While this coild not be observed as depending on any transmission particle or rope, it was mechanically consistent with Newtons idea of a principle of action and reaction. even if at a distance.

The problem Newton had was that he proposed space as being empty, so there was nothing physical to transmit his force propositions. Today force particles along with the electron are invented to do just that.

However space is not a nothing, or indeed an empty non physicality. Space has come to be described as filled with fields of one sort or another. Logically this is no more advanced than describing it as filled with spiritual functionaries at best, angels at the most extreme! So why do we accept the field description and not the angel one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet

Modelling magnets

Field of a cylindrical bar magnet calculated with Ampère's model
See also: Two definitions of moment
Two different models exist for magnets: magnetic poles and atomic currents.
Although for many purposes it is convenient to think of a magnet as having distinct north and south magnetic poles, the concept of poles should not be taken literally: it is merely a way of referring to the two different ends of a magnet. The magnet does not have distinct north or south particles on opposing sides. If a bar magnet is broken into two pieces, in an attempt to separate the north and south poles, the result will be two bar magnets, each of which has both a north and south pole. However, a version of the magnetic-pole approach is used by professional magneticians to design permanent magnets.[citation needed] In this approach, the divergence of the magnetization ∇•M inside a magnet and the surface normal component M•n are treated as a distribution of magnetic monopoles. This is a mathematical convenience and does not imply that there are actually monopoles in the magnet. If the magnetic-pole distribution is known, then the pole model gives the magnetic field H. Outside the magnet, the field B is proportional to H, while inside the magnetization must be added to H. An extension of this method that allows for internal magnetic charges is used in theories of ferromagnetism.
Another model is the Ampère model, where all magnetization is due to the effect of microscopic, or atomic, circular bound currents, also called Ampèrian currents, throughout the material. For a uniformly magnetized cylindrical bar magnet, the net effect of the microscopic bound currents is to make the magnet behave as if there is a macroscopic sheet of electric current flowing around the surface, with local flow direction normal to the cylinder axis.[11] Microscopic currents in atoms inside the material are generally canceled by currents in neighboring atoms, so only the surface makes a net contribution; shaving off the outer layer of a magnet will not destroy its magnetic field, but will leave a new surface of uncancelled currents from the circular currents throughout the material.[12] The right-hand rule tells which direction the current flows.

As a society we accept all theses descriptions, but there are societies within societies which hold different viewpoints on everything. The scientist, generally gnostic viewpoint is that we can know the secrets or "Truth" behind our illusory experiences. and these will ultimately be simple! This appealing thought has driven those in the scientific societies for centuries.

Because it is a social thing one has to postulate oneself to join a desired society, and then should one perceive a benefit to that society beyond ones own immediate advancement in society one may postulate again for a hearing, in which the society may be implored to adopt this or that revision. This system is alive and kicking in science today and goes under the name peer review. Secret societies may appear open, but in fact they exact a postulant tribute on members or would be members.

The knowledge that secret socieies hold is not always appreciated by its members, and is often raided by interlopers who join specifically to access secret understandings and technologies. These are their treasures, but no more an explanation of "the truth" than any other. However, mechanical and technical prowess, often called magic may give some commercial or social advantage,

A recent example in which a sreet magician made a bolt screw off a screw to the amazement of all can be explained in terms of magnetic spin under a magnetoelectric current flow.. This is one of the lesser known effects of the magnetic electric interface. Clearly this magician knew about it!

So we have centuries of thinking and experimenting with regard to this magnetic force at a distance and gravity, and the discovery of magnetoelectrostaic behaviours, in which action at a distance occurs but it leads to a spark, a flow, From this spark a particle called the electron was invented and this somehow transferred action to whatever it hit. However, unlike corpuscular collision this particle conveyed an attractive force and momentum. Action at a distance was not explained by this, it was simply transferred onto some suitable messenger particle, assuming it was real.

To get rid of the issue of action at a distance it was necessary to convince the members of the secret scientific society, that electrons are real. After that was done it necessarily followed that action at the distance happened by a particle transfer! Then the hunt was on for the graviton! Lewis carrol expressed this departure into fiction and myth in his poem about the jabberwok http://www.jabberwocky.com/carroll/jabber/jabberwocky.html.

Action at a distance is not explained by particle transfer. Particle transfer simply adapts the hugely successful mechanics to the reality of action at a distance. Particle ransfer is preferred by those who do not much like wave mechanics!

Although space was generally thought of as an empty receptacle, it was generally filled with extensive things. One extennsive invisible magnitude called Aether was generally accepted as being in space as a kind of static medium, especially when light was proposed and postulated by Huygen to be a disturbance in the aether. This was hugely resisted by Newton on the grounds of empirical evidence of such a medium behaving in this way. Newton accepted the aether as a mataphysical concept, and even had corpuscles 'swimming" in it, but he had no grounds for it to be able to transmit an undulatory wave.

The debate Newton started, shaped the scientific method used today,He objected to guessing and then trying to validate a guess. He said that one could deduce from observation, and from using this in conjunction with the method of fluents, and for Classical Mechanics he was right, but not complete. Lagrange modified Newtons calculus to deal with parameters that all varied, with the principle of the least or maximum of that variation as the guide, whereas Newton was looking for and determining constants in parametric relationships.

Newtons method also restricted science to observables , not to conjectures. Inspiration that was not found in the bible therefore was not to be entertained. But Huygens felt that conjecture if inspired by god's visions were admissable. Huygens believed in the aether as being mechanically coupled to the physical matter, but others felt that it was an interface with the very spirit composition of an immaterial god, and therefore not mechanically coupled. It took a bout 2 centuries For Young to finally establish that the aether was mechanically coupled, could support waves of an undulatory nature, and that light was an electromagnetic wave!

Lorentz was a big believer in the aether, His theoretical approach was trial and error based on empirical data. Every error would lead to a reworking of theory by Lorentz. Where his theorising got stuck he simply invented a property of the aether with the required behaviour to overcome the problem. Of course this mostly failed to do justice to the data, but occasionally he had a spectacular succes. His calculation for the electron was one of these. Poincare corrected him on his math, but the result still came through. A year later JJ Thompson found a phenomenon that almost exactly matched this result.

Meanwhile Lorentz was keeping an eye on the experimental data regarding the aether. He checked over and corrected Michelson and Moreley's early inaccurate attempts to confirm the status of the luminiferous aether. No one doubted the aether concept, but what it was no one actually knew either.mapparently there were many anthers or one aether with many properties. The one the science club was interested in was the only one which had been empirically proved to exist by Young. This one light made waves in and this had been adequately demonstrated, or so it was thought. Michelson and Morley threw an unintentional spanner in the works. Suddenly physicists realised they did not know what they had been assuming for nearly 2 centuries. Something was wrong, and Lorentz and his group were the first to suspect that an alternative theory would be needed, and to respond with the theory of the electron. At the same time JJ Thompson was thinking about revising the corpuscular theory of matter in the light of empirical data from all over the world, not the least the extraordinary effectiveness of Dalton's atomic theory in chemistry, alchemy so called.

The kinetic theory of gases pioneered by Maxwell and extended by Kelvin, the work of Faraday and Cooke brought electric tension and fluid states into close association.mdalton's theory of fluids, combined with Mendeleyev lead to a consensus on a periodic table, and the interferometer played a key role in investigating the compounds and elements of that table. When an electric spark was shown to sustain in certain fluid materials ,gases, and to conform to known colours by the standards of interferometry, the electrical nature of chemicals was strongly suggested. Thompson dusted off the old theories of Boyle and others, and maybe even Newton's, and set about to revise them. It was his investigation of Cookes rays that made him famous. He was able to Determine a ray with magnetic properties, that could be accelerated by an electro static tension in the line of flight. By manipulation he was able to demonstrate the beam to be particulate, and to estimate the voltage of the average particle. This was confirmed only a few weeks later by another researcher who had been researching the same thing in America. Thompson had the preeminence, and he took some time to check, revise and write up his findings under the provisional name the Electron. It was then that Lorentz was proven to be correct.

Upuntil this time everything was thought to be vortices in the aether. Corpuscles were somehow a viscous lump of fluid in vorticular rotations. Now a particle model would develop which changed all perception when Einstein put forward his postulation for acceptance in 1905. His propositions were radical, driven by Michelson and Morley failing to prove a luminous aether concept, and others repeatedly failing to demonstrate alternatives. The only particle that was accepted now was the electron, a concept that suddenly had to become real to take the place of aether! From this " real" particle all other particles flowed as a consequence, protons, neutrons, bosons fermions. Particle physics was born, and Dalton's atomic theory reworked repeatedly by Bohr and Rutherford into their atomic model. Thompson's corpuscular sticky pudding was quickly buried, and Einsteins massless electron became the photon. In a very short time this view lead to the atomic bomb, and that validated particle physics in a way and structure no other experiment ever would.

But it was foundation ally wrong! Quantum mechanics single handedly founded by Dirac, based on a line of research directed by Einstein through Schroedinger uncovered a huge mathematical and propositional flaw. The work was based on Grassmann's analysis, and showed that the assumption of an electron particle was wrong. There was no electron particle! Instead there was a dipole of contra forces, a vortexsystem of opposing motions, an aether of opposites. And this applied for every so called nuclear particle.

This so upset the status quo that it was buried in peer review. Dirac was refused his postulation, his begging was ignored, and propositions laid to one side! It would only be accepted if he publicly declared that half his results were nonsense! In the mean time the club set to work to hack it down at the roots. Einstein must have known this would happen. He would not allow schroedinger to associate his name with the research,mbecause he knew it would resurrect the aether! Only later, after the hoo hah died down did Einstein publicly come out supporting the aether concept. No one seemed to realise that his special relativity were mathematical models of an aether. To further obscure the link he wrote it in tensor Maths. Quantum mechanics is the only mathematical interpretation of his aether model, but it clashed with his classical model, and he could not figure out why.

The clash is due to the concepts of aether being in space as a separate entity from space. Aether is space, and it is fractal, that is scale free. Aether is dual and this duality is contra. No contra aether exists unilaterally, it is always dual, always dipolar, always dynamic, always in an action reaction structure in which equilibrium is stochastically the perceived goal, but in fact this is an Ed Lorenz statistical perception. The underlying behaviour is aperiodically reversed!

There is one other toe of contra relationship which is ultimately fundamental to the problems with magneto electric behaviour, that is conjugacy.
Conjugacy is that relationship between a part and a whole on which wholeness is based and arbitrary oppositeness is predicated. In this way arcs of a circle can be seen as contra, opposing each other. This makes orthogonally a contra relationship with pi/2 being contra to 3 pi/2!

So called electricity and magnetism are contra relationships in this sense, and it is this sense that makes them so perplexing to those who think simplistically about the notion of contra.

Newton's third law has all these ramifications, and the simplest exposition of his active principles, the vorticular or conical reference frame exposited so much, to which we must add his fractal method of fluents and ed Lorenz " chaos" theory.

Vortices are always dual, a spiral in rubbing against a spiral out in contra flow. That is the heart of vortices.
And vortices are the heart of toroii. When all is put in place the structure is a nested set of opposing cones within sphere-like toroii, intersecting in dynamic configurations of the fundamental vortex toroii, bot nested amd translated and dynamic. The particular structure of orthogonal toroii is what we experience as magnetoelectrosynamic structures, that is space. It is the dynamics of this cross structure we experience as potential difference pumped up by magnetic levitation, and the collapse of this space we experience as electric discharge Both supplied by the third axis torus which has opposing vortices which meet in a Schauberger collision point from which spreads out a spiral through the other two planar axes forming the connecting toroii for all 3 axes.

Magneto electric action from a third dynamic!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s