Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here: https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)  (Read 22739 times)

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« on: August 22, 2010, 05:25:56 AM »
Gyroscope wheel animation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gyroscope_wheel_animation.gif

Consider a wheel with three axes. One is the spin axis of the wheel. The second one is your input axis. The third one is your output axis.

To better visualize this, find a US quarter in your house that has George Washington facing left on it, or if you dont have such a coin, find any coin in the house.

We will focus on the "head" side of the coin first. Hold the coin up with the head standing upright held between your right thumb and finger. Hold the coin below your head so that you can see the top edge of the quarter.

Question #1: If you rotated the wrist of your right hand clockwise, which direction would the head try to tilt?

Answer: None. Becuase the quarter is not spinning through your fingers, there will be no attempt by the quarter to resist the motion of your fingers.

Question #2: If one picked up a similar size object that had a little wheel spinning inside of it, which direction would that object try to tilt?

* If Mr. Washington decides to turn his head "to his right", two possibilities arise:
** First possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington flipped over counter-clockwise.
** Second possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand counter-clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington back-flipped over clockwise.

* If Mr. Washington decides to turn his head "to his left", two possibilities arise:
** First possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington back-flipped over clockwise.
** Second possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand counter-clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington flipped over counter-clockwise.

Now consider the magnetism of a loop current consisting of the flow of negative charge. If the loop current is rotating clockwise, then north points away from you. If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then south points away from you.
* You can verify this by taking your right hand and making a fist with your thumb sticking out. Now, as you lift your hand, move your thumb in the counter-clockwise direction. If you were somehow to rotate your thumb in a full circle, you would notice that the four fingers on your right hand stay inside the circle (because most people's fingers cannot reach the back side of the hand). The direction of those fingers point in the direction of north; this is the basis of the right hand rule. The polarity is determined by the direction which the fingers point when inside the circle (in this case, we are talking about the tips of the fingers). As a result, the polarity facing you in this example is NORTH. This reflects the above statement: "If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then south points away from you."

Now imagine moving a bar magnet "down" at a 90 degree angle against a wire laid horizontally. If north points outwards, then the bounded currents inside the magnet (of atom-bound electrons) you hold are rotating clockwise. So if the gyroscopic particles are "extensions" of the bounded currents so that they too rotate clockwise, then what will become of them when they hit the wire?

One condition outlined by Mr. Newman as to the nature of the gyroscopic particles is that they spin at the speed of light and they move parallel to that axis of spin at the speed of light. In this way, one achieves E = mc^2 = rotational kinetic energy + translational kinetic energy = (1/2)*m*c^2 + (1/2)*m*c^2. Therefore, their axis of spin is always aligned with the direction of their motion within the magnetic field.

Going along with the "Mr. Washington" visual I have just illustrated above (pick up the quarter again), imagine "Mr. Washington" moving away (i.e. waddling sideways to his right) and down (i.e. with the magnet) from you, in the direction of the North pole of the magnet. What will happen is that "Mr. Washington" will tilt his neck to HIS left (i.e. left ear down). In other words, as the gyroscopic particles going out from the magnet hit the wire, a pressure is applied to them which attempts to cause them to go nose up. Why? When the magnet, from which the particles originate, is rotated (nose) down (i.e. when the magnet is moved 90 degrees down against the horizontally-laid wire), the resistance encountered is by an opposite rotational force (i.e. nose up) due to a hydraulic effect. The reason for this hydraulic effect is not via the mechanism that Newman claimed because the length of the wire in his coil can be traversed by the said gyroscopic particles in a much shorter time than the time the switching mechanism is kept on. The hydraulic effect is due to the magnetic coupling of the neighboring gyroscopic particles to which they maintain nose-to-tail alignment, such that their motion, which is always parallel to their spin axis, is constrained by those in front and behind of them. In this situation, the following applies, "You turned the wrist of your right hand counter-clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington back-flipped over clockwise." So in this case, it also matches with the condition that "Mr. Washington decides to turn his head 'to his right'"

Therefore, if "Mr. Washington" turns his head to his right, his "spin axis" will be deflected to the right, and according to the conditions highlighted above, "Mr. Washington's" kinetic energy will be therefore deflected towards the right. However, consider the conservation of momentum; if the gyroscopic particles were deflected to the right, then it must do so as a result of an action-reaction force (i.e. Netwon's third law). Because of this, the particles capable of interacting with these gyroscopic particles move in the opposite direction, which is to the left.

Another fact we must consider is that a magnetic field has no net charge of its own. Thus, the magnetic field can be said to consist of two types of gyroscopic particles that rotate in opposite in directions, each corresponding to the motion of either negative or positive charges that are necessary to produce that field. Then perhaps it could be said that the type corresponding to negative charge can only be deflected if by negative charge, or otherwise it would be absorbed due to electrical attraction, and the type corresponding to positive charge can only be deflected if by positive charge, or otherwise it too would be absorbed due to electrical attraction.

If we speak of the deflection of the "negative charge" type, then the particles that react to this deflection are the electrons. Therefore, the electrons, which are much lighter than protons, will deflect to the left, producing a magnetic field. Additionally, if we speak of the "positive charge" type, then the particles that react to these are the protons, and because of the opposite rotation of these "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles, the protons will be pushed to the right (though this movement is very slight because protons are more massive than electrons). These results are in agreement with the deflection of charged particles in magnetic fields, as indicated by the .svg image that can be found at the Wikipedia article on the Lorentz force.

Per the definition of the gyroscopic particle requiring its translational motion to be parallel to its spin axis at all times, both types gyroscopic particles will be further deflected so as to travel in spirals around the wire in a direction aligned with the magnetic field lines generated by the electron current, and consequently this reduces their ability to negate the magnetic field generated by the electrons which the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles had pushed in the opposite direction.

So where does the anomalous energy for the Newman motor come from? It turns out that the energy is not from the gyroscopic particles of the rotary magnet, but rather from the gyroscopic particles of the atoms of copper. Think about it. In Newman's motor configuration, what force is driving the magnet in the first place? It's not from the magnet itself.

Therefore, if the energy, in the form of gyroscopic particles, is in fact released from copper atoms, how do they overcome their magnetic attraction of magnetic loops that exist in each atom? Clearly, there must be a magnetic force at play to overcome this attraction.

To remove the gyroscopic particles from the atoms, the axes of these particles, and consequently their direction of motion, must be kept aligned so as to not double-u-turn back to their source (i.e. the atoms from which they came). This requires that a dominantly-strong magnetic field exists that is close to being uniform at the scale of the atom. To be dominantly-strong, the magnetic field must enable the gyroscopic particles to overcome their tendency to be scattered by electromagnetic radiation (heat).

HOW TO GENERATE THE ANOMALOUSLY STRONG MAGNETIC FIELD

First note that ammeters measure conventional current. Conventional (so-called) current "flows" in the opposite direction as electrons!

The actual electric charge goes from the anode to the cathode.

When the battery is discharging, the anode is the negative terminal (i.e. you remove electrons from the (-))
When the battery is recharging, the anode is the positive terminal (i.e. you remove electrons from the (+)).

It turns out that a current may produce a magnetic field different than would be implied by the velocity of their charges alone. Charges not only have velocity, but also acceleration and jerk, which is equal to a change of acceleration per change in time.

The velocity of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.
The acceleration of the charge contributes to its non-conservative electric field.
The jerk of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.

It is a fact of Maxwell's equations that a changing magnetic field produces a non-conservative electric field. The voltage [V] corresponding to the non-conservative electric field [V/m] is in fact the counter-emf. In turn, a changing non-conservative electric field produces a magnetic field, of the opposite polarity.

If the jerk of the electrons is sufficiently high, a magnetic field surrounding the wire can be generated whose strength is much greater than is explicable by the current. To cause the electrons to jerk sufficiently, a back-spike (i.e. a voltage spike in the opposite direction of the initial current) is required. Granted, the current of the back-spike produces a change magnetic field due to the velocity of the electrons, that actually detracts from the magnetic field of the initial "pre-back-spike" current, however the detraction from the magnetic field is totally overcome by the magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons. The magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons therefore overcomes the parasitic effect normally associated with back-spikes.

The stronger the jerk relative to the ultimate velocity of the charge, the stronger this anomalous field. Therefore, when this anomalous field is strong enough to overcome the formerly dominant magnetic forces at play inside the atoms, this causes the paths of gyroscopic particles to align, and thus increase the radius of their path curvature, which forces them to spiral outwards. As the gyroscopic particles extend from atoms, and eventually the wire, they will either attract or repel the rotary consisting of the permanent magnet. Those that will attract it will latch itself to the permanent magnet, and thereby deliver its kinetic energy to the many particles inside the magnet, and in the process of attraction, cause it to rotate. Those that repel would do so and latch onto something else, or they may take a double-u-turn to later attract that same magnet, imparting even more kinetic energy to the magnet.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 05:29:03 PM by kmarinas86 »

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Gyroscopic Particles 2.0 (how they work)
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2010, 07:54:58 PM »
This following is to address the need for an amendment to my previous explanation for the Newman effect.

There will be several changes to the concept, and a few simplifications.

A major revision is involved to due a sign error, but a remedy has been found nevertheless.

It has come to my attention that the field in the picture of the following link points out of the page and towards the viewer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lorentz_force.svg

Therefore, if we point the north lines of a magnet away from us, and if we then move them down the wire, (1) the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles will be deflected to the right, and (2) it will deliver net power to the right! The former (i.e. (1)) remains the same as before, but now must correct that post with the latter (i.e. (2)).

GYROSCOPIC PARTICLES 2.0 (how they work)

Q: So how is net power produced if the forces involved must always be equal and opposite?

X[___A___]C_____D[______B______]Y

Massive object X is displaced from point C a distance of A.
Less massive object Y is displaced from point D a distance of B.

In the general case of displacement constrained in 1 dimension, displacement will be roughly inverse-related to mass for small v_initial:

displacement=[(1/2)*a*t^2]+v_initial*t
displacement=[(1/2)*(force/mass)*t^2]+v_initial*t

Since the magnitude of forces between Object X and Object Y are equal but opposite, the less massive object will undergo more displacement*force = work. Thus more energy is directed in the less massive object Y's direction and less energy is directed is more massive object X's direction.

Because gyroscopic particles are said to have a tiny amount of mass that is related directly to their energy content, this mass is very tiny compared to the mass of electrons. As a result, when such gyroscopic particles are deflected to the right by interaction with proton, electron, or what have you, they deliver net power to the right. And when such gyroscopic particles are deflected to the left, they deliver net power to the left. The above shows why this not have to violate Newton's third law.

The diagram in the following link says that if a north pole pointing towards you is intercepted by an electron even closer to you from the left, the electron will be deflected upwards (i.e. the velocity vector of the electron will turn 90 degrees counter-clockwise from your point of view). This is the equivalent of pointing the south lines of a magnet at conductor laid horizontally further away and moving those south lines downwards in front of them. This is the opposite relationship that was assumed in the previous post.

(See revision of 08:59, 20 June 2006)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lorentz_force.svg

Q: How can this explain the existence of a net direction of power flow in a wire when there also exists a "positive charge" type of gyroscopic particles as well?

The "positive charge" type would be electrically attracted to electrons, and thus would be accelerated inwards, thus providing no net force to electrons except that which can be accounted for in the electrical attraction. As it remains trapped, it cannot cause the electrons move. Instead, it merely adds to the heat. Tentatively, we can assume that thermal radiation consists of alternating patterns of "positive charge" type and "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles that are aligned magnetically, rotating in opposite directions, and both moving forward at the speed of light. When such photons impact a mass, "positive charge" and "negative charge" types would deflected at opposite directions, essentially unzipping them into two separate power flows.

For positively-charged subatomic nuclear particles, their preference for attracting gyroscopic particles are opposite that of electrons. For these, the "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles get absorbed while the "positive charge" type are deflected and contribute to net power. However, since most subatomic nuclear particles are shielded by negatively-charged electron orbitals, the contribution of net power in an electric generator is predominately by the involvement of the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles, not the "positive charge" type.

Q: How can I be sure that the "negative charge" type will contribute power flow in the right direction and that it will cause electron current flow?

Review the following material before proceeding.

Gyroscope wheel animation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gyroscope_wheel_animation.gif

Consider a wheel with three axes. One is the spin axis of the wheel. The second one is your input axis. The third one is your output axis.

To better visualize this, find a US quarter in your house that has George Washington facing left on it, or if you dont have such a coin, find any coin in the house.

We will focus on the "head" side of the coin first. Hold the coin up with the head standing upright held between your right thumb and finger. Hold the coin below your head so that you can see the top edge of the quarter.

Question #1: If you rotated the wrist of your right hand clockwise, which direction would the head try to tilt?

Answer: None. Becuase the quarter is not spinning through your fingers, there will be no attempt by the quarter to resist the motion of your fingers.

Question #2: If one picked up a similar size object that had a little wheel spinning inside of it, which direction would that object try to tilt?

* If Mr. Washington decides to turn his head "to his right", two possibilities arise:
** First possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington flipped over counter-clockwise.
** Second possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand counter-clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington back-flipped over clockwise.

* If Mr. Washington decides to turn his head "to his left", two possibilities arise:
** First possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington back-flipped over clockwise.
** Second possibility: You turned the wrist of your right hand counter-clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington flipped over counter-clockwise.

Now consider the magnetism of a loop current consisting of the flow of negative charge. If the loop current is rotating clockwise, then north points away from you. If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then south points away from you.
* You can verify this by taking your right hand and making a fist with your thumb sticking out. Now, as you lift your hand, move your thumb in the counter-clockwise direction. If you were somehow to rotate your thumb in a full circle, you would notice that the four fingers on your right hand stay inside the circle (because most people's fingers cannot reach the back side of the hand). The direction of those fingers point in the direction of north; this is the basis of the right hand rule. The polarity is determined by the direction which the fingers point when inside the circle (in this case, we are talking about the tips of the fingers). As a result, the polarity facing you in this example is NORTH. This reflects the above statement: "If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then south points away from you."

Now imagine moving a bar magnet "down" at a 90 degree angle against a wire laid horizontally. If north points outwards, then the bounded currents inside the magnet (of atom-bound electrons) you hold are rotating clockwise. So if the gyroscopic particles are "extensions" of the bounded currents so that they too rotate clockwise, then what will become of them when they hit the wire?

One condition outlined by Mr. Newman as to the nature of the gyroscopic particles is that they spin at the speed of light and they move parallel to that axis of spin at the speed of light. In this way, one achieves E = mc^2 = rotational kinetic energy + translational kinetic energy = (1/2)*m*c^2 + (1/2)*m*c^2. Therefore, their axis of spin is always aligned with the direction of their motion within the magnetic field.

Going along with the "Mr. Washington" visual I have just illustrated above (pick up the quarter again), imagine "Mr. Washington" moving away (i.e. waddling sideways to his right) and down (i.e. with the magnet) from you, in the direction of the North pole of the magnet. What will happen is that "Mr. Washington" will tilt his neck to HIS left (i.e. left ear down). In other words, as the gyroscopic particles going out from the magnet hit the wire, a pressure is applied to them which attempts to cause them to go nose up. Why? When the magnet, from which the particles originate, is rotated (nose) down (i.e. when the magnet is moved 90 degrees down against the horizontally-laid wire), the resistance encountered is by an opposite rotational force (i.e. nose up) due to a hydraulic effect. The reason for this hydraulic effect is not via the mechanism that Newman claimed because the length of the wire in his coil can be traversed by the said gyroscopic particles in a much shorter time than the time the switching mechanism is kept on. The hydraulic effect is due to the magnetic coupling of the neighboring gyroscopic particles to which they maintain nose-to-tail alignment, such that their motion, which is always parallel to their spin axis, is constrained by those in front and behind of them. In this situation, the following applies, "You turned the wrist of your right hand counter-clockwise while the head of Mr. Washington back-flipped over clockwise." So in this case, it also matches with the condition that "Mr. Washington decides to turn his head 'to his right'"

Therefore, if "Mr. Washington" turns his head to his right, his "spin axis" will be deflected to the right, and according to the conditions highlighted above, "Mr. Washington's" kinetic energy will be therefore deflected towards the right. However, consider the conservation of momentum; if the gyroscopic particles were deflected to the right, then it must do so as a result of an action-reaction force (i.e. Netwon's third law). Because of this, the particles capable of interacting with these gyroscopic particles move in the opposite direction, which is to the left.

Q: How does the energy come out of atoms?

Briefly scan the following material before proceeding.

One condition outlined by Mr. Newman as to the nature of the gyroscopic particles is that they spin at the speed of light and they move parallel to that axis of spin at the speed of light. In this way, one achieves E = mc^2 = rotational kinetic energy + translational kinetic energy = (1/2)*m*c^2 + (1/2)*m*c^2. Therefore, their axis of spin is always aligned with the direction of their motion within the magnetic field.

[...]

Per the definition of the gyroscopic particle requiring its translational motion to be parallel to its spin axis at all times, both types gyroscopic particles will be further deflected so as to travel in spirals around the wire in a direction aligned with the magnetic field lines generated by the electron current, and consequently this reduces their ability to negate the magnetic field generated by the electrons which the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles had pushed in the opposite direction.

So where does the anomalous energy for the Newman motor come from? It turns out that the energy is not from the gyroscopic particles of the rotary magnet, but rather from the gyroscopic particles of the atoms of copper. Think about it. In Newman's motor configuration, what force is driving the magnet in the first place? It's not from the magnet itself.

Therefore, if the energy, in the form of gyroscopic particles, is in fact released from copper atoms, how do they overcome their magnetic attraction of magnetic loops that exist in each atom? Clearly, there must be a magnetic force at play to overcome this attraction.

To remove the gyroscopic particles from the atoms, the axes of these particles, and consequently their direction of motion, must be kept aligned so as to not double-u-turn back to their source (i.e. the atoms from which they came). This requires that a dominantly-strong magnetic field exists that is close to being uniform at the scale of the atom. To be dominantly-strong, the magnetic field must enable the gyroscopic particles to overcome their tendency to be scattered by electromagnetic radiation (heat).

HOW TO GENERATE THE ANOMALOUSLY STRONG MAGNETIC FIELD

First note that ammeters measure conventional current. Conventional (so-called) current "flows" in the opposite direction as electrons!

The actual electric charge goes from the anode to the cathode.

When the battery is discharging, the anode is the negative terminal (i.e. you remove electrons from the (-))
When the battery is recharging, the anode is the positive terminal (i.e. you remove electrons from the (+)).

It turns out that a current may produce a magnetic field different than would be implied by the velocity of their charges alone. Charges not only have velocity, but also acceleration and jerk, which is equal to a change of acceleration per change in time.

The velocity of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.
The acceleration of the charge contributes to its non-conservative electric field.
The jerk of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.

It is a fact of Maxwell's equations that a changing magnetic field produces a non-conservative electric field. The voltage [V] corresponding to the non-conservative electric field [V/m] is in fact the counter-emf. In turn, a changing non-conservative electric field produces a magnetic field, of the opposite polarity.

If the jerk of the electrons is sufficiently high, a magnetic field surrounding the wire can be generated whose strength is much greater than is explicable by the current. To cause the electrons to jerk sufficiently, a back-spike (i.e. a voltage spike in the opposite direction of the initial current) is required. Granted, the current of the back-spike produces a change magnetic field due to the velocity of the electrons, that actually detracts from the magnetic field of the initial "pre-back-spike" current, however the detraction from the magnetic field is totally overcome by the magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons. The magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons therefore overcomes the parasitic effect normally associated with back-spikes.

The stronger the jerk relative to the ultimate velocity of the charge, the stronger this anomalous field. Therefore, when this anomalous field is strong enough to overcome the formerly dominant magnetic forces at play inside the atoms, this causes the paths of gyroscopic particles to align, and thus increase the radius of their path curvature, which forces them to spiral outwards. As the gyroscopic particles extend from atoms, and eventually the wire, they will either attract or repel the rotary consisting of the permanent magnet. Those that will attract it will latch itself to the permanent magnet, and thereby deliver its kinetic energy to the many particles inside the magnet, and in the process of attraction, cause it to rotate. Those that repel would do so and latch onto something else, or they may take a double-u-turn to later attract that same magnet, imparting even more kinetic energy to the magnet.

What needs to be clarified is how magnetic fields are actually produced by the changing acceleration of electrons. Also what needs explaining is why such magnetic fields will actually reinforce the magnetic field of the "pre-back-spike" current (i.e. the initial motion of moving charge).

Consider the following conductor (made of .'s) that is harboring electrons (made of -'s):

CIRCUIT OFF STATE
..........-.......................-....
.....................-.............-...
..-.........-..........-...............
..........-........................-...
....-...........-...........-..........

(10%) ON STATE
..........-.......................-....
.....................-.............-...
V...->........->..........->...........
..........-........................-...
....-...........-...........-..........

(40%) ON STATE
..........-........................-...
V.....................^..........^.....
VV......->>.....->>........->>.........
V..........v......................v....
....-...........-...........-..........

(60%) ON STATE
.......<-.......................<-.....
VV................^.............^......
VV........->>>....->>>......->>>.......
VV.......v.......................v.....
..<-..........<-..........<-...........

(80%) ON STATE
V.....-..........................-.....
VV..............->............->.......
VV...........->>>.....->>>......->>>...
VV.......->.......................->...
V..-..........-............-...........

(100%) ON STATE
VV......->>>...............->>>........
VV...............->>>..........->>>....
VV...............->>>....->>>......->>>
VV.....->>>..............->>>..........
VV....->>>......->>>......->>>.........

CIRCUIT OFF STATE: Electrons are not moving.
(10%) ON STATE: Voltage source begins to appear (center first).
(40%) ON STATE: Some electrons get scattered.
(60%) ON STATE: Back-emf causes current to reverse directions in the wire. A circular magnetic field is generated by resulting circulating currents of small radii.
(80%) ON STATE: Reverse currents are slowed down.
(100%) ON STATE: All currents moving forward. Only the circular magnetic field due to forward moving current remains.

Back-to-back reversals between different levels of on states generate what is known as the skin effect. In AC, each of these circulating currents will have to reverse direction very rapidly, causing wasteful losses. This is why the skin effect is parasitic to the needs of power transfer.

Q: How do we increase the magnetic field produced by these currents without generating many losses with the Skin Effect?"

What we do is to try to not reverse the directions of the currents in the process. In other words, we use triangular pulsed DC (i.e. /|/|/|) for the majority of on-off switchings. This will create an pulsed circulating current (no reversal) and magnetic field (no reversal), which will help the atoms to align in a way not possible with AC. By comparing the integration of functions g(x)=x^2 (integrating one DC pulse) and h(x)=(sin(x*pi+pi/2))^2 (integrating from crest to trough) from x=0 to x=1, one can compare the amount of R*I^2 losses (peak to peak) for each case, (1/3) for pulsed DC case and (1/2) for the AC case respectively. The DC case wastes 1/3 less energy per cycle for such circulating currents given for the magnitude of their peak magnetic field. We also must not allow the current to reach the current 100% on state. This requires that the conductor be switched on for an interval that is a fraction of the L/R circuit time constant, which makes generating triangular pulsed DC relatively straight-forward (i.e. simple mechanical switching).

And finally, when the circuit is broken, such circulating currents would impact the spark gap. The spark gap creates a high electrical potential and behaves as capacitor that is breaking down. This concentration of electrons impacting this suddenly increased resistance would deflect other incoming electrons, and thereby creating more of the circulating currents as described above. The behavior would be similar to that of dropping an ice cube in a glass full of melted water.

This creates the required anomalously strong magnetic field required to align the atoms, and subsequently constrain the motion of gyroscopic particles in matter in larger radius paths that escape these atoms, as elaborated in the following:

So where does the anomalous energy for the Newman motor come from? It turns out that the energy is not from the gyroscopic particles of the rotary magnet, but rather from the gyroscopic particles of the atoms of copper. Think about it. In Newman's motor configuration, what force is driving the magnet in the first place? It's not from the magnet itself.

Therefore, if the energy, in the form of gyroscopic particles, is in fact released from copper atoms, how do they overcome their magnetic attraction of magnetic loops that exist in each atom? Clearly, there must be a magnetic force at play to overcome this attraction.

To remove the gyroscopic particles from the atoms, the axes of these particles, and consequently their direction of motion, must be kept aligned so as to not double-u-turn back to their source (i.e. the atoms from which they came). This requires that a dominantly-strong magnetic field exists that is close to being uniform at the scale of the atom. To be dominantly-strong, the magnetic field must enable the gyroscopic particles to overcome their tendency to be scattered by electromagnetic radiation (heat).
« Last Edit: August 31, 2010, 09:31:17 PM by kmarinas86 »

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Gyroscopic Particles 3.0 (how they work)
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2010, 05:55:38 AM »
The opening post discussed the spin of gyroscopic particles, the "positive charge" types and "negative charge" types of gyroscopic particles, and the alignments and other conditions necessary to pull out energy from atoms, where each atom is an agglutination of gyroscopic particles that prefer to stay within that atom.

The second post accounted for the sign of the deflection of energy and gave answers to the following questions:

Quote from: kmarinas86
Q: So how is net power produced if the forces involved must always be equal and opposite?
Q: How can this explain the existence of a net direction of power flow in a wire when there also exists a "positive charge" type of gyroscopic particles as well?
Q: How can I be sure that the "negative charge" type will contribute power flow in the right direction and that it will cause electron current flow?
Q: How does the energy come out of atoms?
Q: How do we increase the magnetic field produced by these currents without generating many losses with the Skin Effect?"

This third post will account for other phenomenon. Namely:
1: The direction of eddy currents
2: The vortex motion of gyroscopic particles
3: Conditions for negative charge bias in the magnetic field - a possible means of levitation
4: The material composition of counter-emf

Q: What determines the direction of eddy currents?

The second post established that:
* A north pole passing downward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the right.
* A south pole passing downward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the left.
* A north pole passing upward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the left.
* A south pole passing upward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the right.

Now consider a conducting loop of wire laid flat on a table. If you take a north pole from above and bring it closer to the loop, that loop of wire will generate an opposing magnetic field. The result is that the electron current in the loop of wire rotates counter-clockwise.

Now consider what happens if you took the loop of wire and hanged it on the wall while maintaining its shape. Now bring the magnet closer to the loop, and it should still cause the current to rotate counter-clockwise. As the magnet approaches, the lines of force of the magnet which cross the wire change from those that are bundled more tightly to those that are bundled less tightly (i.e. the field lines that are off to the side). Those that are bundled more tightly eventually pass the wire and slide toward the inside of the loop. As a result, those lines of force that are bundled most tightly are seen to move from outside the loop to inside the loop. If the magnet approaches with its north pole facing the loop, the bundle of lines below the center of loop will cause current to move to the right, while the bundle of lines above the center of the loop will cause current to move to the left, resulting in a counter-clockwise motion of current which repels the north pole.

Reversing the polarity would reverse the direction of the induced current. So too would reversing the velocity.

Q: What is the motion of gyroscopic particle in space?

There are four types of gyroscopic particles.

Type-A) A negatively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its north.
Type-B) A negatively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its south.
Type-C) A positively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its north.
Type-D) A positively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its south.

Type-A and Type-B gyroscopic particles are emitted primarily from electrons, but they can be emitted from protons as well.
Type-C and Type-D gyroscopic particles are emitted primarily from protons, but they can be emitted from electrons as well.

When current flows away from the viewer, Type-A and Type-C gyroscopic particles are seen to rotate clockwise.
When current flows away from the viewer, Type-B and Type-D gyroscopic particles are seen to rotate counter-clockwise.

Gyroscopic particles, by definition, have a forward velocity of the speed of light. However, when trapped inside an electron, their average velocity parallel to the wire is less than the speed of light. For an electron travelling at 1/50th the speed of light, gyroscopic particles spend 49 percent of their time going backwards and 51 percent of their time going forwards. For an electron travelling 49/50ths the speed of light, gyroscopic particles spend 99 percent of their time going forwards, and 1 percent of their time going backwards.

When the pathway of the electron is bent around an axis, the gyroscopic particles increase density on the side closer to that axis and reduce density on the side further away from that axis. The stronger field in the side closer to that axis attracts the gyroscopic particles toward a right angle orientation. When the gyroscopic particles move to the other side, away from the axis, they are relatively free of that constraint, and thus are relatively free to move in the general direction of the electron. The stronger force inside the curve means that they will extend further from the wire within that curve than outside of it.

Thus, per the right hand rule, if the electron is curving left (i.e. counter-clockwise from the perspective of a person looking down on its path), more clockwise-moving north-directed gyroscopic particles would be deflected upward on the left side than those deflected downward on the right side. Also, more counterclockwise-moving south-directed gyroscopic particles would be deflected downward on the left side than those deflected upward on right side.

In a relativistic case, gyroscopic particles would exit at a skewed angle. The result is that the magnetic field of a relativistic loop current would consist of two tornado-like forms coming from both sides of the path. Also, the gyroscopic particles co-existing in one of those two forms will tend to attract when placed in the front or rear of each other, but will tend to repel side-by-side, resulting in the formation of discrete helical strands of higher magnetic field intensity.

Such a helical magnetic field can be seen in extragalactic jets originating from black holes located at the center of galaxies. The north-bound gyroscopic particles would come out of one end and the south-bound type on the other. Both types may or may not return to the magnetic field they departured. When they do not, it is simply a matter being deflected away from the field via eddy currents. The reduced presence of returning gyroscopic particles, due to their dissipation within eddy currents and subsequent deflection away from the system, would ensure that the gyroscopic particles would provide a net motive force outward, as opposed to inward, from the magnetic field, which would allow them to add net energy to extragalactic jets.

Q: What conditions are there, if any, for a negative charge bias in the magnetic field?

In just about any electrical circuit, the motion of negative charges are what primarily give rise to a magnetic field. The reason for this is the lower mass of electrons compared to protons allows electrons to be accelerated more readily in a electric field. As a result, the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles recieves an additional push from these electrons that the "positive charge" type will not. As a result, for a brief period of time, the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles in the magnetic field exceeds that of the "positive charge" type.

Inductance is a property of electromagnets that reduces the rate at which current rises and falls. It is a property that resists a change in magnetic field. Likewises, magnetic fields that extend outside matter and into the surrounding space also have an associated inductance.

Just as there is a time constant of growth and decay of electron currents in an electromagnet, there is a time constant of growth and decay of gyroscopic particles in the magnetic field. Additionally, an initial charge seperation of the gyroscopic particles is produced the moment that electron voltage pressure is applied to the circuit. It too has a time constant of growth and decay. However, such a charge seperation quickly collapses as the "positive charge" types of gyroscopic particles catch up against "negative charge" in alignment with the magnetic field of the electromagnet.

If such an electromagnet were to turn on and off at a very rapid rate and in a coherent manner, the "positive charge" types would not have time to catch up against the "negative charge" types. As a result, the magnet would have an external field that is repulsive to objects surrounded by a negative electric field. Objects surrounded by negative electric field lines ultimately include all atomic matter, all of which are surrounded by negatively charged electrons. Due to the extensive nature of the "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles, their range would not be limited to within nanometers, but rather they may extend as far as the magnetic field itself, allowing them to carry their negative electric field with it.

Let's say we had a horizontally-laid coil electromagnet (i.e. with magnetic poles set vertically) operating as above (i.e. having the magnetic field permeated by a majority of "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles). If one were to put a permanent magnet inside and revolve it like a clock's hour hand (clockwise) with the south pole pointing out, these "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles would have the general tendency to prefer one direction versus the other. In this case, the direction would be downward. If the center of the rotation of the magnet were shifted off-center, the permanent magnet's distance can be made closer at one end, and further at the opposite end, causing a lateral asymmetry in the shape of electrical distribution of the "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles in the magnetic field, thereby producing a lateral repulsive force.

Q: What is the material composition of counter-emf?

First we consider a model where both electrons and protons may actually consist of minute charges. One question that might follow is whether both electrons and protons are blends of "negative charge" and "positive charge" types of gyroscopic particles.

Photons emitted must be have zero net charge. Thus, electrons and protons for example must be able to emit particles laking in net charge. It is also possible that each photon consist of a stable or quasi-stable array of some combination of up to four types of gyroscopic particles.

Thus, "positive charge" and "negative charge" types of gyroscopic particles may participate in the generation of counter-emf. However, it would stand to reason that in electrical circuits, the majority of counter-emf is due "negative charge" type, for the same reasons mentioned in the first two posts.

It is known that counter-emf results from the change of an electric field, and is in fact opposed to the electric field which generates it. The magnetic field of the counter-emf subtracts from the magnetic field generated by the electric current.

If electrons are subjected to an electric field gradient, a smashing pressure will be opposed upon them as they accelerate. As a result, vortices of gyroscopic particles inside each electron are generated which will attempt to align magnetically with the magnetic field produced by overall electron current, via a process similar to what is described in the second-to-last section "How does the energy come out of atoms?" of the second post "Gyroscopic particles 2.0 (how they work)". The vortices themselves will attract along their axis of rotation, and they subsequently form arch-shaped patterns inside electron. When such vortices develop quickly, by virtue of a fast developing electric field, they induce eddy currents which generate an opposing magnetic field (or back-emf). The eddy currents themselves would be arranged in similar arch shaped patterns. These eddy currents, consisting of gyroscopic particles would themselves also give off gyroscopic particles, but this with these:

1) The north-directed gyroscopic particles move counter-clockwise around the current (as viewed by an observer at the source).
2) The south-directed gyroscopic particles move clockwise around a current (as viewed by an observer at the source).

Because such "gyroscopic particles of gyroscopic particles of electrons" are magnetically opposed to the majority, they are bound to be deflected such that they may or may not be realigned to the majority. Nevertheless, such particles would tend to swerve laterally away to where the magnetic field is less intense. Laterally in this case would be either in the general direction of the electron or against it. Once they are free from the electron, in seeking an even lesser dense field, they are forced to occupy a path of large radius, forcing them outward radially from the path of the electron. When a collision finally occurs, it most often occurs with a particle at a further radius from the point depature. The two most likely possibilites are the following:

1) North-directed gyroscopic particles are knocked inward to rotate in a smaller counter-clockwise path.
2) South-directed gyroscopic particles are knocked inward to rotate in a smaller clockwise path.

The resulting deflection is the same as one would expect when moving the lines of force of a magnet upward through a horizontally-laid conductor placed in front of the magnet. The "negative charge" type of counter-clockwise revolving north-directed gyroscopic particles would be deflected to its left, while the "negative charge" type of clockwise revolving south-directed gyroscopic particles would be deflected to its right. The result is that both types move in opposition to the originating current. This gives rise to the electric portion of the counter-emf.

The same gyroscopic particles thus participate in both the electric and the magnetic field of the system simultaneously.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2010, 06:16:11 AM by kmarinas86 »

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Gyroscopic Particles 4.0 (how they work)
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2010, 03:48:45 AM »
Q: What determines the direction of eddy currents?

The second post established that:
* A north pole passing downward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the right.
* A south pole passing downward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the left.
* A north pole passing upward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the left.
* A south pole passing upward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the right.

Now consider a conducting loop of wire laid flat on a table. If you take a north pole from above and bring it closer to the loop, that loop of wire will generate an opposing magnetic field. The result is that the electron current in the loop of wire rotates counter-clockwise.

Now consider what happens if you took the loop of wire and hanged it on the wall while maintaining its shape. Now bring the magnet closer to the loop, and it should still cause the current to rotate counter-clockwise. As the magnet approaches, the lines of force of the magnet which cross the wire, change from those that are bundled more tightly to those that are bundled less tightly (i.e. the field lines that are off to the side). Those that are bundled more tightly eventually pass the wire and slide toward the inside of the loop. As a result, those lines of force that are bundled most tightly are seen to move from outside the loop to inside the loop. If the magnet approaches with its north pole facing the loop, the bundle of lines below the center of loop will cause current to move to the right, while the bundle of lines above the center of the loop will cause current to move to the left, resulting in a counter-clockwise motion of current which repels the north pole.

Reversing the polarity would reverse the direction of the induced current. So too would reversing the velocity.

The above demonstrates an issue that must be clarified.

In the above example, as the north pole approaches, subsequent lines are more diagonal, for they exist off to the side of the more tightly bundled lines in the center. Thus, while individual lines are seen to translate from outside the loop to inside the loop, the conductors encounter a succession of lines of force which curls from the inside the loop (horizontal) to outside the loop (diagonal).

Thus, the north lines at the bottom half the loop switch from those that are horizontal to those that are "nose" down. Thus, it is equivalent to a north pole being rotated downwards to that bottom half the loop. This causes the current to move to the right.

For the other top half, the north lines switch from those that are horizontal to those that are "nose" up. Thus, it is equivalent to a north pole being rotated upwards to the top half the loop. This causes the current to move to the left.

Together, these cause the current to move counter-clockwise from the point-of-view of the north pole lines. The result is a repulsion.

Therefore, simplifying the cause of gyroscopic deflection of energy as being one of translation relative to the path of gyroscopic particles may in fact be contrary to experimental observations. Therefore, one must consider the following details:

Consider the difference between a static situation where the conductor does not move in relation to the magnetic field of the permanent magnet, and a non-static one:

The north-directed particles and the south-directed particles in a magnetic field of the permanent magnet move in opposite directions. Thus, when they hit the same electron in the conductor, the north-directed particles may experience a tilt "nose" up and turn to its right (if the "negative charge" type) or its left (if the "positive charge" type), while the south-directed particles may experience a tilt "nose" down and turn to its right (if the "negative charge" type) or its left (if the "positive charge type). Such tilts would cause them to be deflected in same direction. However, this is simply one possibility.

In consideration of the four types of gyroscopic particles with a 50% chance that they will be tilted "nose up" and a 50% chance that they will be titled "nose down", upon collision with an electron, no preferred direction of motive force results from this interaction, and the result is no work being done that electron.

However, when a field is rotated, the balance between the four types of gyroscopic particles is breached. For example, if one were to rotate a north pole towards a conductor with the south pole further away from the conductor, the north-directed gyroscopic particles (i.e. TYPE-A and TYPE-C) would be first to affect it, thus providing the motive force. However, not too long after that, the south-directed gyroscopic particles (i.e. TYPE-B and TYPE-D) would counter this change, resulting again in a dynamic equilibrium. The nature of that dynamic equilibrium depends on whether or not the conductor is a superconductor and whether or not the magnet maintains the same field change through time. For a superconductor, the dynamic equilibrium has a persisting electric current. For a regular conductor, the dynamic equilibrium is a condition that forms after the electrical current has dissipated as heat. Alternatively, if the rate of magnetic field changes were somehow maintained over time, then the equilibrium involves a stable current, as long the induced power matches the power dissipated as heat.

Now consider a dynamic situation where work is done on the conductor to cause it to cut up vertically through the horizontally-aligned north end of the magnetic field of the permanent magnet at right angles:

In this case, there is a balance between the four types of gyroscopic particles in the overall magnetic field of the permanent magnet. On the other hand, work must be done on the electrons to move the conductor up through, at right angles, to the external magnetic field. When not significantly affected by the magnetic field, the positive charges and negative charges in the conductor produce opposite magnetic fields (as reflected by their opposite charges) existing at plane perpendicular to the motion of the conductor, as opposed to being perpendicular to the length of the conductor. Each charge may have all four types of gyroscopic particles in their surrounding magnetic fields. However, each magnetic field either has a dominance of the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles, as it is in the case of electrons, or a dominance of the "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles, as it is in the case of protons.

Clearly the work that was done on the conductor that generated that current also allowed effort to be dispersed within the material to rearrange the pathways of gyroscopic particles, and subsequent patterns of magnetic polarization surrounding both positively-charged and negatively-charged subatomic particles that comprise their opposite magnetic fields.

From the point of view of the magnetic field, when it is directly above the electron (or just about), the circular magnetic field of that electron constitutes a north pointing in a counter-clockwise circular path. Later, when the point of view is instead directly below electron (or just about), the circular magnetic field constitutes a north pointing in a clockwise path.

The two types of "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles in the electron's magnetic field are north-directed and south-directed (i.e. aligned or counter-aligned with this path).

Let's call them (-,-,Ndir) and (-,-,Sdir).

The two types of "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles in the electron's magnetic field are north-directed and south-directed (i.e. aligned or counter-aligned with this path).

Let's call them (+,-,Ndir) and (+,-,Sdir).

From the point of view of the magnetic field, when it is directly above the proton (or just about), the circular magnetic field of that proton constitutes a north pointing in a clockwise circular path. Later, when the point of view is instead directly below proton (or just about), the circular magnetic field constitutes a north pointing in a counter-clockwise path.

The two types of "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles in the proton's magnetic field are north-directed and south-directed (i.e. aligned or counter-aligned with this path).

Let's call them (-,+,Ndir) and (-,+,Sdir).

The two types of "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles in the proton's magnetic field are north-directed and south-directed (i.e. aligned or counter-aligned with this path).

Let's call them (+,+,Ndir) and (+,+,Sdir).

(-,-,Ndir) is deflected to its left when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected towards the center of the electron.
(-,-,Sdir) is deflected to its right when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected towards the center of the electron.
(+,-,Ndir) is deflected to its right when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected away from the center of the electron.
(+,-,Sdir) is deflected to its left when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected away the center of the electron.

(+,+,Ndir) is deflected to its right when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected towards from the center of the proton.
(+,+,Sdir) is deflected to its left when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected towards the center of the proton.
(-,+,Ndir) is deflected to its left when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected away the center of the proton.
(-,+,Sdir) is deflected to its right when subject to the force from above, and thus is deflected away the center of the proton.

As a result, it can be seen that collisions with the gyroscopic particles that comprise the magnetic field of the permanent magnet generate forces that try to rid the proton of "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles while also generating forces that try to rid the electron of "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles.

Through these collisions, which they resist, protons become "purified" of negative charges and electrons become "purified" of positive charges. The greater the forces, and the longer they are applied, the greater the purification attainable.

By definition, protons in atoms have successfully attracted one or more electrons into one or more electron shells.

In atoms, collisions with the gyroparticle field:

* Squeeze the atomic nucleus
* Deflect tiny "contaminating", "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles away from the atomic nucleus and onto the electron shell
* Squeeze the electron shells
* Deflect tiny "contaminating", "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles away from the electron shells

As for ions:

* Positive ions would tend to emit "contaminating", "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles.
* Negative ions would tend to emit "contaminating", "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles.

Because electrons surround all atomic nuclei, the primary emission would be that of "contaminating", "positive charge" type gyroscopic particles. What is left is a mass that has a negative charge, in agreement with the observation that the electric field lines in the earth's atmosphere point inward (See: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1998/TreshaEdwards.shtml). It is also in agreement with an observation verified in the 1960's that the sun has a negative charge (See: The Sun's Electrical Charge by Bailey, V. A. (1964). Nature 201: 1202-1203.).

Because gyroscopic particles are simultaneously energy, momentum, mass and charge traveling at the speed of light, it can be said that the internal energy of gyroscopic particles within atoms do not individually or in any other way increase or decrease in energy. They are units of energy, and thus they cannot gain or lose any energy. Therefore deflection of this energy to a different orbital path radius changes both its wavelength and frequency, but it does not change its kinetic energy.

Such interactions may increase in volume and intensity with the density of the gyroparticle field and the velocity through it as long as additional "contaminating" gyroscopic particles in the proton, the electron, or both, still exist. These "contaminating" gyroscopic particles are in fact necessary for this process to conserve angular momentum. Because the mass and velocity of each gyroscopic particle must both be constant, gyroscopic particles constitute units of momentum, and if the radius of path curvature were reduced overall on that system, then system's angular momentum must reduce by definition. Thus, to conserve angular momentum, the sum of all vector radii of path curvature must be a constant in a closed system.

Over time, the "contaminating" positively-charged gyroscopic particles could be thrown out of the electronic, planetary, and stellar systems and into the interstellar void. As of now, such charges would appear to be a tiny fraction of the total charge of the system. However, if trends continued, a very large potential difference would be generated, and the result would likely be the heating of gases in filament patterns. The sooner that the electrical potential difference unleashes a discharge, the smaller the discharge would be.

For example, in the smallest of protogalaxies, such potential differences could have resulted in their merger, and increased the frequency of stellar formation as a whole, and thereby returning a point where another such electrical potential difference may be produced in the future by the same process. On the other hand, some of the energy would "seem" to be permanently contained in lost photons that will "never" be absorbed by matter again, a claim that could be dealt away with in a fractal universe consisting of various expanding and contracting materials of unlimited variation in size and surface area in which light could be collected. One possibility includes dark spheres on the order of billions of light years across and weighing more than 5 times than what physicists believe is the mass of the known universe. Ever since maps of the microwave background radiation of the universe have been created, such spheres may in fact be literally hidden in plain sight, due to their actual nature as massive giants being hidden by the poor angular resolution of such maps.

As a general characteristic of the above process described above, the emissive energy within a system will tend to disperse more rapidly as internal frequencies increase, and will continue to do so at that rate so as long the potential difference formed between the positive charge in the interstellar void and the negative charge of planetary and stellar masses does not short out through the electrically insulating vacuum of space.

Frequency differences are produced at various levels of matter. For example:

The nucleus subjected to the dense gyroparticle field will contract....
Thus requiring gyroscopic particles within the atomic nucleus to take less time to revolve around the nuclear center....
Which thereby increases the frequency of the atomic nucleus....
While that same process deflects "contaminating", "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles out of the grip of the proton's magnetic field....
Then the "contaminating", "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles are bombarded onto the interior area of the electron shells....
And when the pressure of those "contaminating", "negative charge" type gyroscopic particles rises....
Electron shells must occupy more space, and in doing so....
The gyroscopic particles of the electron shells must take more time to make revolutions around the nucleus....
And thus the frequency of electron shell is decreased.

It is the negatively-charged particles which must undertake what is currently referred to as "time dilation". As a result of the frequency decrease of negative charges, anything electronic in nature will be subject to time dilation. However, nuclear processes would increase in frequency when moved quickly through the gyroparticle field, and such would permit time acceleration.

Atomic clocks operate by resonance with electron transition frequencies, and thus they would only observe time dilation effects, not time acceleration effects.

In gravitational fields, matter is observed to undergo a decrease in frequency. That frequency is related to their internal clocks. If you believe in GR and SR, then such shifts in frequency can be equated with shifts in the rate passage of time. However, I do not favor the concept of a rate passage of time, but rather I prefer to think of shifts in the frequency of cycles inherent within matter. In my view, frequency can go up and down relative to the baseline, and thus the rate passage of time can both increased and decreased relative to the baseline.

Mike Hawkins discovered an unusual feature of quasars: Quasar spectra do not exhibit the degree of time dilation predicted by conventional cosmological theories concerning the Big Bang. In other words, they are observed to be at a higher frequency than expected.

The quasar anomaly could be explained by the above proposed mechanism for the time acceleration of nuclear processes. Also, because the quasars' energy intense environment pulverizes matter, many electrons are broken free from the grip of the positive nuclei, and their interaction with the intense magnetic field of the quasars would deflect the relatively lighter electrons more readily, causing them to disperse in a much larger cloud than the formed by the bare positive nuclei. That outer cloud is electrically negative. The most intense activity occurs in the center, where much of the electrons have been scattered away, revealing a center consisting mainly of positive nuclear charges. The result is that the high frequency activity at the hotter center, where the orbital period around the quasar is smaller, is not subject to "time dilation", for "time dilation" in this hereforto proposed depiction of gyroscopic particles is regarded as merely a frequency decrease associated with the radius and wavelength expansion of electron shells, such that time dilation would not at all affect the frequency at the center of quasars where their presence is reduced.

Overall, the quantity of gyroscopic particles pervading this field as well as the velocity (including both speed and direction) in relation to this field would determine the rate at which the dispersion of frequencies increased, where negative charges decrease frequency and positive charges increase frequency.

In relativity too, it is said that velocity, in addition to gravitational wells produced by concentrated energy "mass", causes time dilation effects. However, relativity does require the notion of spacetime, whereas the new idea present in this topic does not.

I prefer to not believe in a curving "spacetime" or even curved "space" itself.

I also doubt that velocity is strictly relative, for all acceleration is due to work done with respect field potentials, each of which itself has an initial position, and whose displacement occurring in the presence of the object determines the work each potential does on that object. This work appears to be what generates the physical characteristics of the magnetic field, as opposed to being due to a "pure" velocity that could be regarded outside the context of a two-body system (+ observer). The work is itself is a transfer of gyroscopic particles from many bodies to another "body", and therefore the acceleration is fundamentally a change in centripetal acceleration, as opposed to a linear acceleration. The illusion of a "linear" acceleration can be created by reducing centripetal acceleration of a constant velocity, such that the particles trace larger paths (i.e. c^2/r reduces as r increases), with a preference to extend over some length, which would make the centripetal acceleration in fact one that oscillates up and down, with an average value lower than the steady state value. The larger paths to be traced would result in a time dilation that is ultimately due to the changes in centripetal acceleration that result from path deflection, as opposed a "linear" velocity as commonly assumed due to the common perceptual bias that favors the macroscopic over the microscopic definitions of the movement of a "gross" object when discussing simple mechanical pushing. The directional anisotropy of the input energy can be likened to the source of propagation of sounds waves through gas, liquids, or solids that follows from impacting objects, and such can in effect "stretch" the motion of particles such that their vibration occurs back and forth along that distance.

The hereforto discussed ideas of gyroscopic particles necessitate that the surface of all atomic matter, composed of electron shells, must expand, not contract, when in the presence and relative motion of a matter, in contrarian distinction to the present views of the General Theory of Relativity. As early as 3 years ago in August 25, 2007, or 71 days before I discovered the ideas of Joseph Newman in November 4, 2007 (when in fact Joseph Newman was 71 years old), I had proposed something similar, but without differencing between dissimilar charges:

Time acceleration hypothesis (Galaxies) - Science Forums (thread started on August 25, 2007)
« Last Edit: September 22, 2010, 05:54:48 AM by kmarinas86 »

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Gyroscopic Particles 5.0 (how they work)
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2010, 02:05:56 PM »
Because gyroscopic particles are simultaneously energy, momentum, mass and charge traveling at the speed of light, it can be said that the internal energy of gyroscopic particles within atoms do not individually or in any other way increase or decrease in energy. They are units of energy, and thus they cannot gain or lose any energy. Therefore deflection of this energy to a different orbital path radius changes both its wavelength and frequency, but it does not change its kinetic energy
[...]
I also doubt that velocity is strictly relative, for all acceleration is due to work done with respect field potentials, each of which itself has an initial position, and whose displacement occurring in the presence of the object determines the work each potential does on that object. This work appears to be what generates the physical characteristics of the magnetic field, as opposed to being due to a "pure" velocity that could be regarded outside the context of a two-body system (+ observer). The work is itself is a transfer of gyroscopic particles from many bodies to another "body", and therefore the acceleration is fundamentally a change in centripetal acceleration, as opposed to a linear acceleration. The illusion of a "linear" acceleration can be created by reducing centripetal acceleration of a constant velocity, such that the particles trace larger paths (i.e. c^2/r reduces as r increases), with a preference to extend over some length, which would make the centripetal acceleration in fact one that oscillates up and down, with an average value lower than the steady state value. The larger paths to be traced would result in a time dilation that is ultimately due to the changes in centripetal acceleration that result from path deflection, as opposed a "linear" velocity as commonly assumed due to the common perceptual bias that favors the macroscopic over the microscopic definitions of the movement of a "gross" object when discussing simple mechanical pushing. The directional anisotropy of the input energy can be likened to the source of propagation of sounds waves through gas, liquids, or solids that follows from impacting objects, and such can in effect "stretch" the motion of particles such that their vibration occurs back and forth along that distance.

A summary of the above quoted text:
1) Gyroscopic particles undergo zero linear acceleration.
2) An illusion of linear acceleration is generated due to an overall increase in the radii of path curvature of gyroscopic particles within an object.

Thus, the phenomenon of electrical attraction and electrical repulsion must be somehow be accounted for by same mechanical mechanism described in the first post.

Also consider what was said in the third post:

There are four types of gyroscopic particles.

Type-A) A negatively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its north.
Type-B) A negatively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its south.
Type-C) A positively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its north.
Type-D) A positively charged gyroscopic particle moving in direction of its south.

Type-A and Type-B gyroscopic particles are emitted primarily from electrons, but they can be emitted from protons as well.
Type-C and Type-D gyroscopic particles are emitted primarily from protons, but they can be emitted from electrons as well.

When current flows away from the viewer, Type-A and Type-C gyroscopic particles are seen to rotate clockwise.
When current flows away from the viewer, Type-B and Type-D gyroscopic particles are seen to rotate counter-clockwise.

Gyroscopic particles, by definition, have a forward velocity of the speed of light. However, when trapped inside an electron, their average velocity parallel to the wire is less than the speed of light. For an electron travelling at 1/50th the speed of light, gyroscopic particles spend 49 percent of their time going backwards and 51 percent of their time going forwards. For an electron travelling 49/50ths the speed of light, gyroscopic particles spend 99 percent of their time going forwards, and 1 percent of their time going backwards.

________

ELECTRICAL REPULSION

Now consider the fact that if you have two like-charged particles, their fields are known to overlap, and such fields will produce what appears to be "electrical" repulsion.

Type-Negative Bundle) A bundle consisting of Type-A and Type-B gyroscopic particles moving in opposite directions.

When Type-A particles and Type-B particles existing within the same Type-Negative bundle both hit the same object, they will be deflected in the same direction. For example, if they hit an object nose-down, the Type-A particles will deflect to their right, and the Type-B particles, going in the opposite direction, will deflect to their left.

As electrons approach each other, the currents of their gyroscopic particles increase in magnitude as they are made to travel in smaller loops while maintaining their velocity at c. Such currents (sets of "bundlets") not only go in opposite directions, but also have like charge, and thus each of the two sets of bundlets per bundle would generate Lorentz forces directed oppositely of one another when in the presence of a magnetic field. Thus such bundles are unstable to magnetic fields, and their split components will turn around back to their source. The gyroscopic particles are thus deflected away from the space straight between the electrons, and thus they are unattracted to that space. Thus the repulsion between electrons constitutes splitting Type-Negative bundles and reversing the direction of the subsequent "bundlets".

Type-Positive Bundle) A bundle consisting of Type-C and Type-D gyroscopic particles moving in opposite directions.

When Type-C particles and Type-D particles existing within the same Type-Positive bundle both hit the same object, they will be deflected in the same direction. For example, if they hit an object nose-down, the Type-C particles will deflect to their left, and the Type-D particles, going in the opposite direction, will deflect to their right.

As protons approach each other, the currents of their gyroscopic particles increase in magnitude as they are made to travel in smaller loops while maintaining their velocity at c. Such currents (sets of "bundlets") not only go in opposite directions, but also have like charge, and thus each of the two sets of bundlets per bundle would generate Lorentz forces directed oppositely of one another when in the presence of a magnetic field. Thus such bundles are unstable to magnetic fields, and their split components will turn around back to their source. The gyroscopic particles are thus deflected away from the space straight between the protons, and thus they are unattracted to that space. Thus the repulsion between protons constitutes splitting Type-Positive bundles and reversing the direction of the subsequent "bundlets".

________

ELECTRICAL ATTRACTION

Now consider the fact that if you have two oppositely charged particles, their fields are known to overlap, and such fields will produce what appears to be "electrical" attraction.

So if you have a negative charge emitting Type-A and Type-B gyroscopic particles, and a positive charge emitting Type-C and Type-D gyroscopic particles, bundles will form between the opposite charges. Two types of such bundles will exist:

Type-AC Bundle) A bundle consisting of Type-A and Type-C gyroscopic particles moving in opposite directions.
Type-BD Bundle) A bundle consisting of Type-B and Type-D gyroscopic particles moving in opposite directions.

The reason that makes them bundles is the same as prior. When they strike an object, the particles of each bundle are deflected in the same direction. For example, a Type-A particle is deflected to its right when it hits an object nose-down, while a Type-C particle in the same bundle and going in the opposite direction is deflected to its left, causing both to be deflected at the same right angle.

However, unlike Type-Positive or Type-Negative bundles, Type-AC bundles and Type-BD are stable to magnetic fields.

This is because the Lorentz force of each type of bundle affects their inner bundlets in the same manner, which is due to the fact that each bundlet consists of currents of oppositely-charged gyroscopic particles flowing in opposite directions, as opposed to like-charged gyroscopic particles flowing in opposite directions. Such stability to magnetic fields allows these gyroscopic particles to continue further along a relatively linear trajectory, allowing for closer approach of opposite charges. The closer the opposite charges are, the larger the volume of gyroscopic particles emitted between them, which thereby accelerates this process.

The above accounts for electrical attraction and repulsion without postulating that gyroscopic particles experience any form of linear acceleration, and thus it allows each of them to have constant kinetic energy and a constant magnitude of momentum.

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Corrections to "Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)"
« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2011, 03:11:06 AM »
Slight corrections must be made to the above.

http://tinyurl.com/2handsrule

This affects:
Version 1.0:
1) "Now consider the magnetism of a loop current consisting of the flow of negative charge. If the loop current is rotating clockwise, then north points away from you. If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then south points away from you." Wrong. The reverse is true: "Now consider the magnetism of a loop current consisting of the flow of negative charge. If the loop current is rotating clockwise, then south points away from you. If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then north points away from you."
2) "* You can verify this by taking your right hand and making a fist with your thumb sticking out. Now, as you lift your hand, move your thumb in the counter-clockwise direction. If you were somehow to rotate your thumb in a full circle, you would notice that the four fingers on your right hand stay inside the circle (because most people's fingers cannot reach the back side of the hand). The direction of those fingers point in the direction of north; this is the basis of the right hand rule. The polarity is determined by the direction which the fingers point when inside the circle (in this case, we are talking about the tips of the fingers). As a result, the polarity facing you in this example is NORTH. This reflects the above statement: "If the loop current is rotating counter-clockwise, then south points away from you."" Wrong. The right-hand rule assumes CONVENTIONAL CURRENT.
3) Nothing else. No other problems with Version 1.0.
Version 2.0:
Quote from: The Kmarinas86 of August 31, 2010
1) This following is to address the need for an amendment to my previous explanation for the Newman effect.

There will be several changes to the concept, and a few simplifications.

A major revision is involved to due a sign error, but a remedy has been found nevertheless.

It has come to my attention that the field in the picture of the following link points out of the page and towards the viewer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lorentz_force.svg

Therefore, if we point the north lines of a magnet away from us, and if we then move them down the wire, (1) the "negative charge" type of gyroscopic particles will be deflected to the right, and (2) it will deliver net power to the right! The former (i.e. (1)) remains the same as before, but now must correct that post with the latter (i.e. (2)).

GYROSCOPIC PARTICLES 2.0 (how they work)

Q: So how is net power produced if the forces involved must always be equal and opposite?
1.... This remedy is not necessary. What actually happens is that when north-bound gyroscopic particles are struck by copper from the bottom, it will pivot left. After this, they will be likely be struck again from the bottom by some other part of the mass (copper), again pivoting left. This result in two changes in direction which will work against the magnet (i.e. Lenz's law). This is the action. The reaction is the energy deflected on electrons and copper atoms which propagates the conductor to the right, rather than traveling along the external magnetic field.
2)
Version 3.0:
1)
Quote from: The Kmarinas86 of September 19, 2010
Q: What determines the direction of eddy currents?

The second post established that:
* A north pole passing downward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the right.
* A south pole passing downward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the left.
* A north pole passing upward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the left.
* A south pole passing upward through a conductor laid horizontally on front of it will cause an electron current to deflect to the right.

Now consider a conducting loop of wire laid flat on a table. If you take a north pole from above and bring it closer to the loop, that loop of wire will generate an opposing magnetic field. The result is that the electron current in the loop of wire rotates counter-clockwise.

Now consider what happens if you took the loop of wire and hanged it on the wall while maintaining its shape. Now bring the magnet closer to the loop, and it should still cause the current to rotate counter-clockwise. As the magnet approaches, the lines of force of the magnet which cross the wire change from those that are bundled more tightly to those that are bundled less tightly (i.e. the field lines that are off to the side). Those that are bundled more tightly eventually pass the wire and slide toward the inside of the loop. As a result, those lines of force that are bundled most tightly are seen to move from outside the loop to inside the loop. If the magnet approaches with its north pole facing the loop, the bundle of lines below the center of loop will cause current to move to the right, while the bundle of lines above the center of the loop will cause current to move to the left, resulting in a counter-clockwise motion of current which repels the north pole.

Reversing the polarity would reverse the direction of the induced current. So too would reversing the velocity.
1.... Actually, this is totally opposite of what is correct. The current induced is clockwise, not counter-clockwise to produce an opposing north pole. This results from the lines of the north pole cutting the loop from the outside to the inside of it, causing the current to flow right on the top and left on the bottom (as well as up on the left and down on the right).
2) "Thus, per the right hand rule, if the electron is curving left (i.e. counter-clockwise from the perspective of a person looking down on its path), more clockwise-moving north-directed gyroscopic particles would be deflected upward on the left side than those deflected downward on the right side. Also, more counterclockwise-moving south-directed gyroscopic particles would be deflected downward on the left side than those deflected upward on right side." Wrong. The terms "north-directed" and "south-directed" should be swapped.
3)
Quote from: The Kmarinas86 of September 19, 2010
These eddy currents, consisting of gyroscopic particles would themselves also give off gyroscopic particles, but this with these:

1) The north-directed gyroscopic particles move counter-clockwise around the current (as viewed by an observer at the source).
2) The south-directed gyroscopic particles move clockwise around a current (as viewed by an observer at the source)."
[....]

When a collision finally occurs, it most often occurs with a particle at a further radius from the point depature. The two most likely possibilites are the following:

1) North-directed gyroscopic particles are knocked inward to rotate in a smaller counter-clockwise path.
2) South-directed gyroscopic particles are knocked inward to rotate in a smaller clockwise path.
3.... Terms "clockwise" and "counter-clockwise" should be swapped.
Version 4.0:
1)
Quote from: The Kmarinas86 of September 21, 2010
The above demonstrates an issue that must be clarified.

In the above example, as the north pole approaches, subsequent lines are more diagonal, for they exist off to the side of the more tightly bundled lines in the center. Thus, while individual lines are seen to translate from outside the loop to inside the loop, the conductors encounter a succession of lines of force which curls from the inside the loop (horizontal) to outside the loop (diagonal).

Thus, the north lines at the bottom half the loop switch from those that are horizontal to those that are "nose" down. Thus, it is equivalent to a north pole being rotated downwards to that bottom half the loop. This causes the current to move to the right.

For the other top half, the north lines switch from those that are horizontal to those that are "nose" up. Thus, it is equivalent to a north pole being rotated upwards to the top half the loop. This causes the current to move to the left.

Together, these cause the current to move counter-clockwise from the point-of-view of the north pole lines. The result is a repulsion.

Therefore, simplifying the cause of gyroscopic deflection of energy as being one of translation relative to the path of gyroscopic particles may in fact be contrary to experimental observations.
1.... This remediation is unnecessary and the mechanism proposed is wrong and inconsistent with the correct mechanism. The correct mechanism is that the lines cut through the wire and does generate the current necessary to provide an opposing pole (as a my recent correction above gives).
2) "Consider the difference between a static situation where the conductor does not move in relation to the magnetic field of the permanent magnet, and a non-static one:[....]Now consider a dynamic situation where work is done on the conductor to cause it to cut up vertically through the horizontally-aligned north end of the magnetic field of the permanent magnet at right angles:" Simply change the terms "north" and "south" and these sections are fixed.
Version 5.0: For the entire thing (including quoted text), the terms "north" and "south" must be changed. Everything else can be left alone.

All of the novel implications remain, such as those relating to levitation, the negative charge bias of matter, the positive charge bias of outer space, the contraction of charge radii when subject to drag forces, the time dilation of electrons, the time acceleration of atomic nuclei, the process of obtaining gyroscopic matter-energy, the explanation of the quasar anomaly, the explanation for electrical forces, the shape of the magnetic field, and "contaminated" charge etc..

--- Coincidence is nothing. ---

The following link only gives versions 1 through 5 of "Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)". Later versions will be posted elsewhere.
http://tinyurl.com/GyroscopicParticlesHowTheyWork

Later versions of "Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)" must correct for mistakes in the prior versions dealing with the relationship between polarity of the current and the polarity of the magnetic field. The TWO-HAND rule will be introduced which gives clearly the correct association of conventional current and electron current with N *and* S poles. The TWO-HAND rule, which I came up with, can be found at:
http://tinyurl.com/2handsrule

Quantum Mechanics must apply Mach's principle because otherwise it makes no sense
http://tinyurl.com/qmmach6n8

Entropy is substance
http://tinyurl.com/entropyissubstance

3.14.11 I need to be better with many of my timing predictions (LOL) The cost of my 2011 Project as of now is JUST under \$600 (Added from 25 receipts including invoices from online purchases). This figure includes my purchase today of 6 cubic inches of more magnets that should prepare the way for my test with the 32" Fan blade. I will make at least one video with the small 19.375" fan before I take a go at it.

1.26.11 With the help of some Scotch mounting tape, the commutator is almost completed. The motor should be done tomorrow and a video uploaded by day's end. All necessary purchases have been made. Actual costs (including tax):

\$468.80 Tot

9-07-10 \$6.46 Gorilla glue (little used)
11-16-10 \$109.17 Legos (\$8.32 tax and \$10.95 sh)
12-4-10 \$113.92 First coil (\$7.84 tax \$11.89 sh)
12-15-11 \$3.10 Self-Stick door sweep (Used to mold the coil)
1-11-11 \$6.38 Shaft, nuts, pipes, washers
1-11-11 \$1.19 Small twist ties (little used)
1-13-11 \$2.99 Large twist ties (little used)
1-14-11 \$213.55 Second coil and magnets (\$14.97 tax \$1.50 ins. \$15.27 sh)
1-23-11 \$8.18 Dremel motor brushes (4)
1-25-11 \$0.86 Large washers
1-26-11 \$2.50 Mounting tape

1.23.11 I project completion of the entire system by Tuesday night and a video upload by the evening of Wednesday January 26.

1.26.11 I plan to finish the magnet assembly and post a video of it on Tuesday 1-18-11 and the entire motor before the Houston Auto Show ends on January 30.

12.15.2010 I encountered problems with the tension of the wire. As a result, I am reconsidering how I will wind the coil. The coil, which was about 34.9ohms is now only about 29.4ohms. The next coil when purchased will be to match it.

12.7.2010 So much for the estimate! The package has already arrived, and its probably because it is shipped from only 300 miles away. Video soon!

12.4.2010 I have purchased the first copper coil. Estimated shipping and processing time is 7 days + weekend. It might take longer due to a special request to specifically get 11 pounds so as to not get 9, 10 or 12 pounds.

11.16.2010 I have purchased the Legos. Est. shipping time = 11 days.

[[ NEW MOTOR ]]

[ SWITCHING ELEMENTS ]

( COMMUTATOR )

â— Non-magnetic
â— Prefabricated
â— No cutting or drilling
â— 4 contacts to the battery anode
â— 4 contacts to the battery cathode
â— Alternating contacts on the disk (+,-,+,-,+,-,+,-)

Bare copper wire

Wrapped around legos

Stripped wire from old ribbon cables from my earlier projects

â— Supported by the rear lego tower
â— Brushes remain at their respective connections.

( COIL BRUSHES )

â— Supported by the lego towers
â— Connect to opposite sides of the coil.
â— Change their respective connections during operation:

During switching, both brushes should be disconnected from the battery.

After switching, brushes must swap terminals.

[ IN-LINE ELEMENTS ]

( SHAFT ELEMENTS )

â— Torque transfer: Ten new square nuts 1/4" thick and 1/2" wide with a 5/16" hole
â— Bearing stabilizer: Hex nuts

Edge touching bearings must be beveled to prevent jamming

â— Skate Bearings

â— Glue

Hold square and hex nuts on to the shaft

Already purchased for a separate purpose

( MAGNETS )

â— N42 Neo

12 cubic-in (previous design 39 cubic-in)

â— 8 section rotor
â— Magnets move @ right angles to

the current

the magnetic fields

â— N-S ring magnets attract other N-S magnets in place
â— N-S magnets attract S-N magnets

N-S & S-N magnets beside and anti-parallel of each other

[ CONDUCTOR ]

â— Copper Magnet Wire

22lbs (previous design 11lbs)

7000ft

â— Alternate polarity 8x around the perimeter
â— Windings shape similar to the "independent" sign:

Reduce redundant wire closest to the shaft

Reduce redundant wire out on the perimeter

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2847
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #6 on: April 01, 2011, 10:58:24 PM »
More illustrations. Less words. We are most noobs in here. I did fell off the thread after reading 4-5 words...

#### forest

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4076
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2011, 11:38:04 AM »
We need a short description first ( a briefing), especially when english is not our native language

1. What are those gyroscopic particles ? Electrons ? Don't think so. Ether ?
2. Where are they ? Where are they coming from ?
3. Do they push electrons ? Are they the motive force for electric current ?
4. The nature of jerk process. The magnetic field impulse is coming from where ? From electrons ? from gyroscopic particles ?

I believe Joseph Newman is right anout electricity being mechanical force on electrons. For me this force has sound-like nature.

I have also one question which still bother me : is this is true then why when I connect lightbulb between positive and negative terminal of battery it can light but not when I do the same using terminals of TWO different batteries ? It should work too, electrons are here and potential difference (voltage) can be measured between negative and positive terminals of different batteries. What am I missing here ?

Sorry, as alway I found your thread extremally interesting but also too hard to comprehend due to missing pictures/videos. I understand the problem with preparing them.

Many thanks for your deep knowledge and willingness to share it with us ! I'm desperately trying to use something similiar with jerking electrons and re-using back-emf storing in capacitor system. Still a lot to make however.

#### forest

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4076
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2011, 11:43:58 AM »
Pictures, pictures ,pictures...  Maybe you can make a tutorial with quarter dollar rotating with pictures ? I don't have any

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #9 on: August 01, 2011, 09:29:45 PM »
We need a short description first ( a briefing), especially when english is not our native language

1. What are those gyroscopic particles ? Electrons ? Don't think so. Ether ?

They are field particles.

Here is my alternative explanation:

Each MEC has a constant:
*Mass
*Energy
*Charge
*Speed - The speed of every "mass-energy-charge" must be exactly equal to the speed used in deriving the mass-to-energy relationship. In this case, it is the speed of light.
*Momentum
All energy and matter are fundamentally 100% comprised of MECs.

(Click for image) A MEC. All MECs are circularly polarized. A sum of MECs may result in a elliptically polarized photon provided that the MECs added together have opposite rotations. When the oppositely rotating MECs pass each other twice per rotation at points separated by 180 degrees, such that they occasionally exist the same line radial to the path of propagation (allowing them to travel through a thin small gap), then the photon is linearly polarized.

(Click for image) Spin speed = Propagation speed

Each MEC travels in a corkscrew path:
*c = Spin speed = Propagation speed
*The spin and propagation velocities are orthogonal to each other.
*The energy inherent in the spin speed is equal to that inherent in the propagation speed. The sum of these energies for a mass m is E=mc^2.
*MECs travel along magnetic field lines such that the corkscrew motion combined with their charge produces a magnetic field aligned with the external magnetic field.
*[F]orce is an exchange of MECs.

2. Where are they ? Where are they coming from ?

* Mass and Fields
* Mass and Fields

3. Do they push electrons ?

Yes, but they can also pull electrons. Everything that is mechanical is done by them.

FINE PRINT:

When everything is made of gyroscopic particles traveling at the same speed, "pushes" and "pulls" are all but macroscopic illusions.

There is only deflection of internal kinetic energy traveling at the speed of light. Internal kinetic energy is nothing more than potential energy - they are one and the same. Gravity is the deflection of such internal energy towards a gravitating body. For example, when a pendulum swings, the kinetic energy of the pendulum is gained from its own mass, and that energy converges towards the earth. When that kinetic energy is lost to the environment due to friction losses, this produces a mass defect of that pendulum, and it is caused by the divergence of energy from the mass as a result of colliding with external mass-energy.

For charges subjected to gravity, the amount of lost energy is such that the mass-ratio of a proton and an electron at the same gravitational potential is unaltered, but their masses are not constant. All except for the most anomalous of electromagnetic effects are masked due to the perseverance of the constant charge-to-mass ratio as well as the tendency for highly proximal force pairs to be dominant, due to both the steepness of the 1/r^2 and 1/r^3 force laws, and in cosmological scales, the time-retarded potential, which prevents force pairs between highly different gravitational potentials from being identified.

Gravity and electromagnetism together compose a combined force (which you may call the GEM force) which is repulsive at close ranges and attractive at far ranges. This is directly related to the phenomenon found in a superconductor which is suspended above, below, or beside a magnetic rail. The repulsion between a superconductor and a magnet when pressed together is the same as the repulsion between two solid objects on impact, and the attraction between the superconductor and the magnet when one attempts to pull away the superconductor is the same as attraction due to gravity. In both cases, we are dealing with superconducting currents inside atoms. In both cases, the force is diamagnetic, which is an opposition to changes in the magnetic field.

The diamagnetic force occurs via thin bundles of magnetic field lines that connect every mass with every other mass, like the magnetic loops on the sun, but infinitesimal. In weak planetary magnetic fields, a two-dimensional cross-section of magnetic field lines at the infinitesimal level can resemble a pile of hay, oriented strand board, or even tossed noodles, which reflects the lack of magnetic polarization that characterizes weak-field diamagnetism.

All losses convert mass into light. Thus, converting mass (potential energy) into kinetic energy and back into potential energy (mass), as a pendulum does, without losing much of the energy to space, similar to regenerative braking technologies, should be the goal of overunity. This will, ironically, require some way of harnessing heat that is dissipated in the atmosphere as wind and/or wave energy, which one might regard as "mundane" renewables. Finite energy can be used to do unlimited positive work so as long as there is sufficient negative work recovered in the form of back-emf, photovoltaics, and/or sterling engines. The energy an economy needs to function is only the net work that is built up as stored energy in the economy's moving parts plus any accumulated losses to the environment. Recycling 90% of all energy can translate into 10 times the effective energy reserves (i.e. 100%/(100%-90%)=100%+90%+81%+72.9%+65.61%+....+etc.). Gravity is possibly the best recycler of this energy, potentially recovering 100% of all energy, which can result in a "perpetual universe". This can be the case if every photon is due to a charge-pair interaction occurring in such a way that every photon emitted by a body is directed to another mass, however distant it is, completely without exception. This may occur entirely through infinitesimally-thin magnetic field lines, like those just described in the previous paragraph, however, they must stretch as many as billions of light years, and probably even farther than that, so in all practicality, humanity does not, has not, and will not have full access to such a perpetuity.

All true magnetic field lines are infinitesimal, indivisible, and "immortal", meaning they never cease to exist. When it appears as though a magnetic field, which we observe as a finite entity, is "destroyed", all that really happens is that the true magnetic field lines making that apparent magnetic field line cave in and occupy a much smaller space, akin to taking a rubber band and curling it and/or tying it into knot(s) without ever cutting it. Thus, there is also a connection to knot theory as well, although we are talking about "knots" that are made of infinitesimally-thin magnetic field lines. Quantization and chemistry may be explained by attraction and repulsion of magnetic field lines that take the form of prime knots which force magnetic fields into particular configurations as a result of their inability to be split.

In this model, resistance is what causes the splitting of finite charge currents, and infinitesimal current is by definition superconducting because it cannot split anymore. Infinitesimal current is the infinitely split current which can no longer produce joule heat because it is the joule heat, in the purest sense, because it is the energy which makes the photons themselves. Infinitesimally-thin current has 0 AC resistance as well as 0 DC resistance. Material superconductors have no DC resistance, but they do have an AC resistance that is usually rather small.

Only with infinitesimal amounts of current is there zero deviation from the speed of light. All objects are merely compositions of this electrical energy. Objects at "rest" relative to the observer are merely amalgamations of matter where the internal momenta relative to the observer vector-sum to zero.

Concentration and dispersion of matter is derived fundamentally through the optical properties of matter, including their (frequency,direction)-dependent refractive indices, opacity, reflectivity, transparency, etc.. Predicting heat capacity from first principles would be important as well as there may be a connection with optics there too. The energy behaves as a relativistic ionic plasma (of infinitesimal charges). I predict that this idea based on optically-governed momentum transfers should eventually allow a Lorentzian Ether Theory to have a suitable replacement for the curved space-time of General Relativity, someday allowing for a completely Maxwellian and Cartesian approach to electrodynamics which also agrees with astronomical observations without a space-time metric.

In addition to all the above, it can be added that light itself could have its own internal energy at even higher speeds, asymptotically leaning towards infinite speed at ever smaller dimensions that may be resolved at higher fractal iterations in Cartesian space. More speculatively, if such super-luminal gyroscopic particles could be successfully aligned along parallel magnetic field lines, then the photons and mass-energy which they embody could themselves be transported along the magnetic field at super-luminal speeds.

Are they the motive force for electric current ?

Yes.

4. The nature of jerk process. The magnetic field impulse is coming from where ? From electrons ? from gyroscopic particles ?

Primarily it comes from electrons and their internal energy in the form of gyroscopic particles. Other particles may give their energy as well.

I believe Joseph Newman is right anout electricity being mechanical force on electrons. For me this force has sound-like nature.

Sound by itself is a very complex phenomenon. Sounds come and go; a bit like order out of chaos isn't it? Perhaps unsolved theoretical problems relating to physics of turbulence should be solved to fully understand sound itself. At smaller scales, the overlap of sound phenomenon and AC electricity is tremendous, so further study of this will probably be very useful for illuminating the details on what some have described as "longitudinal electricity". If turbulence of ideal gases is hard to model, try the "turbulence" of electromagnetic fields! Perhaps marriage of the two phenomenon can be a good idea. I propose that we should follow Newman's advice (per his book "The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman") and resurrect the concept of caloric. Additionally, we should identify caloric as a density-medium of discrete charged, magnetic particles sharing the same fixed speed which have a precise mechanism for angular momentum transfer in quantum steps.

I have also one question which still bother me : is this is true then why when I connect lightbulb between positive and negative terminal of battery it can light but not when I do the same using terminals of TWO different batteries ? It should work too, electrons are here and potential difference (voltage) can be measured between negative and positive terminals of different batteries. What am I missing here ?

I am not sure why you get that result. Current should exist between batteries in the battery pack, as well as across battery packs. It could be that your voltage is too low, or the connections were not made, which could be due to a failed battery, failed connector, or something like that.

Sorry, as alway I found your thread extremally interesting but also too hard to comprehend due to missing pictures/videos. I understand the problem with preparing them.

It's great that someone understands the difficultly of preparing images! To make it even more difficult, if you consider the type of material involved, animations will prove to be totally necessary to communicate the point effectively, especially given that many predictions will depend on dynamic multiple-event interactions. I'm not a 3D artist yet, and I need to become one to produce correct visuals. Before I even try to write the first line of code, I need to think of the concept map first of what I am planning, streamline it, then figure out the most condensed way to present a complete full-spectrum presentation in interactive video 3D, with versions adapted for a live studio audience when necessary, otherwise I will waste too much time producing incorrect, inaccessible, and less compelling visuals.

Many thanks for your deep knowledge and willingness to share it with us ! I'm desperately trying to use something similiar with jerking electrons and re-using back-emf storing in capacitor system. Still a lot to make however.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2011, 04:15:46 AM by kmarinas86 »

#### verpies

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3473
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2013, 03:49:07 PM »
1. What are those gyroscopic particles ? Electrons ? Don't think so. Ether ?
Not electrons, but electrons can channel and deflect these gyroscopic particles . Protons can channel (a through motion) them even more.
IMO opinion these particles are just units of rotating 3D space/time. (not 3D space & 1D time) and because of this, they are confused with an all pervading Aether.
Stacking spins onto these gyroscopic particles, makes electrons or positrons out of them. Adding more spins makes muons and adding more spins makes protons out of them...

2. Where are they ? Where are they coming from ?
Since they are the mere relation between units of space and time (a definition of motion), they are everywhere and all matter is made out of them. Microscopically all motion moves at c, it is only when it is looped (by spinning) then it may appear as arrested motion in 1, 2 or 3 dimensions of space or time,  but only when averaged over 2 or more units.

3. Do they push electrons ?
Yes and they also push protons, positrons, muons, etc... by mechanical bombardment.

Are they the motive force for electric current ?
They are the electric current ...when directionalized linearly.
Just because they also push electrons outside of conductors, does not mean that electric current inside solid conductors consists of moving electrons.

4. The nature of jerk process. The magnetic field impulse is coming from where ? From electrons ? from gyroscopic particles ?
That I do not understand, but maybe this experiment is related to it.  Also see this.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2013, 07:08:05 PM by verpies »

#### wings

• Hero Member
• Posts: 750
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2013, 09:22:53 PM »

#### kmarinas86

• Full Member
• Posts: 156
##### Re: Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2014, 11:55:39 AM »
It turns out that a current may produce a magnetic field different than would be implied by the velocity of their charges alone. Charges not only have velocity, but also acceleration and jerk, which is equal to a change of acceleration per change in time.

The velocity of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.
The acceleration of the charge contributes to its non-conservative electric field.
The jerk of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.

It is a fact of Maxwell's equations that a changing magnetic field produces a non-conservative electric field. The voltage [V] corresponding to the non-conservative electric field [V/m] is in fact the counter-emf. In turn, a changing non-conservative electric field produces a magnetic field, of the opposite polarity.

If the jerk of the electrons is sufficiently high, a magnetic field surrounding the wire can be generated whose strength is much greater than is explicable by the current. To cause the electrons to jerk sufficiently, a back-spike (i.e. a voltage spike in the opposite direction of the initial current) is required. Granted, the current of the back-spike produces a change magnetic field due to the velocity of the electrons, that actually detracts from the magnetic field of the initial "pre-back-spike" current, however the detraction from the magnetic field is totally overcome by the magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons. The magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons therefore overcomes the parasitic effect normally associated with back-spikes.

The stronger the jerk relative to the ultimate velocity of the charge, the stronger this anomalous field. Therefore, when this anomalous field is strong enough to overcome the formerly dominant magnetic forces at play inside the atoms, this causes the paths of gyroscopic particles to align, and thus increase the radius of their path curvature, which forces them to spiral outwards. As the gyroscopic particles extend from atoms, and eventually the wire, they will either attract or repel the rotary consisting of the permanent magnet. Those that will attract it will latch itself to the permanent magnet, and thereby deliver its kinetic energy to the many particles inside the magnet, and in the process of attraction, cause it to rotate. Those that repel would do so and latch onto something else, or they may take a double-u-turn to later attract that same magnet, imparting even more kinetic energy to the magnet.

The Abraham–Lorentz force (or radiation reaction force) is proportional to the jerk of a charge and the square of its charge value:

Quote
In the physics of electromagnetism, the Abraham–Lorentz force is the recoil force on an accelerating charged particle caused by the particle emitting electromagnetic radiation. It is also called the radiation reaction force. The formula is in the domain of classical physics, not quantum physics, and therefore, may not be valid at distances of roughly the Compton wavelength (λC ≈ 2.43 pm) or below.[1] There is, however, an analogue of the formula which is both fully quantum and relativistic, called the "Abraham–Lorentz–Dirac–Langevin equation". See Johnson and Hu.[2]
The force is proportional to the square of the object's charge, times the so-called "jerk" (rate of change of acceleration) that it is experiencing. The force points in the direction of the jerk. For example, in a cyclotron, where the jerk points opposite to the velocity, the radiation reaction is directed opposite to the velocity of the particle, providing a braking action.

Now imagine the voltage produced by collapsing the magnetic field of the coil in a Newman motor. The large value of jerk which is directed opposite of the velocity of the charges would cause the electrons to radiate in front of themselves. This process would continue once the charge reverse direction, but this time the jerk would be accelerating the charges back towards the battery pack, as acceleration and jerk keep their "negative" direction. This is "overunity" basis of the Newman motor's recharging phase. So a radiation reaction force of the electrons, based on its jerk, may serve as a "normal" explanation for the "radiant energy" discovered by Telsa.

Note that in alternating current, if position was based on sin(t), then velocity would be based on cos(t), acceleration on -sin(t), and jerk on -cos(t), which implies that jerk of charges in an AC waveform would produce a radiation reaction that dampens the charge motion, hence, the great importance of the following exemplar of Tesla's work:

Quote
Of all the great inventions and discoveries of Nikola Tesla, nothing stood out with greater potential benefit to the whole of humanity than his discovery of Radiant ("Dark") Energy. Only after conducting exhaustive experimental trials for three years, did Tesla announce this stupendous discovery in a paper published in December, 1892, entitled "The Dissipation of Electricity". Incredibly, most academicians of the day completely missed the mark in understanding the true significance of his paper. Noted scientists such as Sir Oliver Lodge, mistakenly thought that Tesla was referring to high frequency AC electricity in the operation of the Tesla Transformer, a huge blunder that remains to this day in the misnaming and misinterpretation of the Tesla Coil. The transformer that Tesla referred to in the 1892 paper did not operate on magnetic/electric field induction created by alternating currents. It operated in an entirely new domain of physics based on abrupt discharges of electrostatic potentials and the subsequent release of kinetic Radiant Energy from the omnipresent ether/cosmos. Tesla was now operating under entirely new rules which he referred to as "dynamic"electro-static forces and had, by now, completely abandoned any further interest in the AC waveform. The genesis of the Lodge misunderstanding, however, began a few years earlier with the publication of certain mathematical formulas by a brilliant Scotsman named James Clerk Maxwell.

Note the existence of a magnetic radiation reaction force which is based on the second derivative of jerk with respect to time (i.e. "Crackle"), or alternatively, the fourth derivative of velocity with respect to time, which corresponds to cos(t). However, the force in this case is opposed to the "Crackle" instead of with the jerk, so the magnetic radiation reaction force actually corresponds to -cos(t). The result is that in an AC waveform, the magnetic radiation reaction force also puts a damper on the velocity of the charge, just like the Abraham–Lorentz force does!

The above might give the impression that AC operation is off-limits for a Newman device. Fortunately however, there may be a way to utilize one aspect of the Newman effect without having to use commutation. This involves letting the peripheral fields of the magnet induce the emf into the coil instead of having the lines of force directly next to the poles of a magnet do so. As the peripheral field lines of a magnet are actually reversed in the z-direction of the magnet, as per indicated by the torus nature of the magnetic field, the induced emf they generate in the windings they cut through is actually a forward-emf rather than a back-emf. However, the energy density of the peripheral field is quite low as can be seen on the top part of the picture at:

This is the other reason why most motors don't generate a Newman effect well. The energy density and total energy associated with the peripheral fields are both dwarfed by that associated with the direct vicinity of the poles as well as the magnet's interior where the field of the magnet is strongest. Notice the difficulty that Newman has had increasing the torque density of his motors. There may be a way to remedy this:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Q-Mo-Gen/conversations/messages/136

Quote
Implications for an electric motor of special design:

We will assume that the Lenz effect (back-emf) results from the magnetic component of the Lorentz force in the conducting wires of the circuit and does not result by considering the potential energy of the fields distributed through an arbitrary volume of space. We will assume that the potential energy of the fields distributed through space account for the mechanical work to be done and unused energy returned to the circuit through inductive collapse. If we make this assumption, we are in for an interesting surprise: We can cancel the Lenz effect without eliminating potential to do work!

One way to do this is to wrap a coil with a certain number of turns around a cylinder in a clockwise direction, and then wind another coil around the first-wound coil in series with first-wound coil. The second-wound coil should have a greater number of turns, but in the counter-clockwise direction. Hook this up to a battery, and the result is a magnetic field created between the first-wound (inner) coil and the second-wound (outer) coil. Place a permanent magnet at a right-angle to the shaft, a shaft that pokes through bearings in the sides of the cylinder. Use a commutator to reverse the field every half rotation. If you have the right ratio of turns on the second-wound coil with respect to turns of the first-wound coil, the back-EMF will be cancelled, and the dominant "energy product" of the fields will be that of the peripheral magnetic field of the permanent magnet overlaid by the field contained between the inner and outer coils. Due to the opposite rotation of currents of the inner vs. outer coils, the magnetic field of the coil current is more-or-less cancelled where the physical magnet is.

Another way to do this is to split an iron core into four identical post-shaped pieces (or, rather, use four identical stick-shape iron cores). Distribute these four pieces to four corners of a base. In the space between the four iron cores, place a magnet-shaft-bearing assembly as per the previous example, with the shaft ends each sticking between the two of the four iron cores. Finally, wind a coil around all four iron cores, forming a box-like coil. An optional way to wind would be to wind the coil around each of the four posts, one turn for each passing from corner-to-corner so that way they hug on all sides of each core, producing four sub-coils contained *inside* the main coil. As before, have a commutator connect to the circuit to reverse the polarity of the current every half-rotation. What will happen is that when the coil is turned on, the iron cores will align with the magnetic field of the coils. However, the peripheral field of the cores at the center will be inverted with respect to the central field created by the coils. This occurs at an axis centrally-positioned between the four posts, and this is where the permanent magnet resides. From the iron cores, the magnet will experience a magnetic field of greater magnitude and opposite with respect to the magnetic field brought to it by the coil. The result is that the magnet is attracted to the orientation opposite of what would be expected had there been no iron cores, and therefore the back-EMF is actually negative and will cause the rotor to speed up with greater torque until saturation point is obtained. Therefore, core materials with the highest saturation point are desired, and although such core materials are not necessarily those possessing the highest magnetic permeability, a core material with a high magnetic permeability is desired so that way the iron cores generate a magnetic field much stronger than the field from the coil.

What should one worry about with latter suggestion in the quote above? Having a magnet too close the iron will lead to cogging, when the objective is actually to induce current that magnetizes the soft iron cores so that the cores' peripheral fields (again, also inverted with respect to the z-direction of the cores) superimposed over the magnet to align it to a position advanced of its motion. When the right balance is found, my prediction is that a "miracle" result will occur - self-looping "overunity" behavior without any batteries or capacitors needed. This will require proper 3d modelling software, otherwise much will be wasted on mal-proportioned designs that get stuck in a "cogged" position.