While playing around with magnets, as one sometimes does, we stumbled on a fun way to let the attraction create a stable equilibrium. Steve the Squirrel plays with Magnets Bring two magnets close, they start showing signs of attracting each other, then, like flipping a switch, they race towards each other and stick together, faster than you can see. They make a crash, everyone jumps. But the fun is over, the two are one, and all motion has stopped. Pull them apart and do it all again. I find something deeply biological, or maybe also spiritual about how the separate-and-attracting is the interesting thing to us. All this talk of “becoming one with…”, as if it is something we “truly” want in our “deepest” parts, and yet when the two magnets race together to become one, what is the first thing we do? We pull them apart.
I find this kind of discussion so refreshing. “Experts” will tell you that magnets do not perform any work because there’s no movement, and all what they are doing when holding an object against gravity is maintaining the stored potential energy in the field.
Years ago I was reading an article on a journal of wastewater treatment that dealt with the use of a magnetic field to create a gradient of densities within a paramagnetic fluid that then can be used for separation of plastics of different kind by their different density which makes them buoyant at different depths within the liquid column. It’s a clever way to solve this problem but from reading this article my mind drifted towards and became way more interested in the idea of using this phenomena by means of a permanent magnet to create a permanent flow within a paramagnetic liquid. This was around 2006 and of course after reading a lot I have all sorts of reasons why my idea will never work, and I have “learnt” a lot about magnetism and magnetic fields, yet, if you ask me, I still don’t know why my silly idea can’t ever work.
I can offer an explanation as to how magnets keep on working. I’ve been looking for self-consistent theories as to how the Universe works for 50 years now, and I believe I have one combining the works of Michael Mathis with the Plasma Cosmology/Electric Universe theories, held together by the glue of Per Bak (whose book “How Nature Works” I highly recommend everyone read). I’ve summarised this at https://thehonestscientist.com/, but here are the highlights relevant to this subject:
1. As per the insights of many ancient civilisations, the Universe is “stuff” (matter) and “not-stuff” (space). The latter has no properties apart from 3 dimensions (or 3 co-ordinates, depending on how you define dimensions).
2. As per the idea of atomos matter is ultimately simple – Miles’s model has indivisible incompressible spheres that are as small compared to an electron as an electron is to a town, which he has various names for include “charge field particles”. The base level particles just zip around at the speed of light, c, in straight lines.
3. Through collisions these charge field particles develop spins – not only axially, but also in the x, y and z dimensions (like Earth rotating around the Sun, and kind of like a gyroscope). For each “layer” of spin to be stable it results in the particle appearing to double in size and mass (hence quantisation). This “sea” of small particles is what some people call the “aether” and what others call the “fabric of space-time”; Miles calls it the “charge field”.
4. Once a particle builds up enough layers it’s jittering about so much that it can no longer move in a straight line at c, and it forms a kind of cage that can temporarily trap smaller particles. For larger particles with an outside “layer” of axial spin most of the smaller particle leave around the “equator” and enter via the “poles”. The smallest stable particle that does this we call the electron. A few more “layers” of spin and you get the proton. Due to its larger effective size more particles enter and leave protons, so when many protons and electrons are close the protons are pushing each other away faster due to a larger stream of particles, so it looks like they repel each other and in contrast attract the electrons – ergo the basis of charge, and the idea that like charges repel whereas unlike charges attract.
5. With a sufficient density or enough time protons and electron can line up along the poles to achieve a stable arrangement – ergo atoms. With even more density/time these atoms can line up in groups – ergo molecules, or bulk materials.
6. As atoms become larger with more protons and electrons they get more complex structures (not too dissimilar from the Structured Atom Model of Otte et al, but predating this). These different structures result in different flows of charge field particles and in bulk different properties – e.g. a large flow of charge field particles in one direction results in a (literal) current of electricity. Particles spinning around this current are what we measure as magnetism. Flows can also explain why in bulk certain elements are gaseous vs liquid vs solid, plus radioactivity and a heap of other properties.
I’ll stop at this level as we’re now at the point where we can explain persistent magnetism – the structure of certain elements such as iron result in flows of charge field particles that we call magnetism, especially when sizeable numbers of atoms are tweaked to line up. The magnetism is persistent as it is the result of the flow of charge particles – the iron atoms themselves are not really doing any work apart from determining the directions the much more abundant charge field particles travel – this is the wheelwork of nature that Tesla discussed; the constant flow of these charge field particles, that when harnessed in the appropriate fashion provide what we call energy, magnetism and many other things.
On a more philosophic note, this means that were are all interconnected, literally – statistically a small number of particles flowing through me are probably flowing through you a fraction of a section later as you read this, and through pretty much everything on Earth, and a few seconds later the Moon, a few minutes later the Sun, and so on. Happy to discuss further if interested.
On an entirely different note – I hope that you and the SAFIRE/Aureon team have been following the work of the MFMP – Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project, especially the YouTube videos of Bob Greenyer. As per his recent presentations they’ve good evidence to support the theory that charge separation (e.g. plasma double-layers in SAFIRE) result in plasmoids that in turn can produce large amounts of energy via transmutation of elements (especially Hydrogen, Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen).
Whilst this will most likely be the energy source of the future, they have found it is not without its dangers – several Russian experimenters have unexpectedly passed, and they believe this to be because during their experimentation some of the plasmoids passed through their bodies, transmuting bone, muscle and more on the way through. Whilst our body’s immune system and healing processes can handle some of this, depending upon where these plasmoids go they could result in serious illnesses like cancer, or even more immediate problems like strokes and heart attacks.
Furthermore, it appears that conventional shielding will NOT necessarily stop these plasmoids – they can pass through most materials virtually unhindered. He has been informed, however, of a form of layered protection that seems to work, incorporating thermal insulation, heat accumulation, radiation protection and a phosphor – for details see:
So could you please ensure that the SAFIRE/Aureon team are aware of the possible dangers and put in place suitable forms of protection if they are not already doing so. Presumably consumer devices et al that incorporate this technology in the future will also need some form of protective layering such as this incorporated into them.
Thanks for your time and I hope you find this useful.
Incredibly ‘magnetic’ ideas! I always say that our ‘experts’ know far less FOR CERTAIN than they let on (typically) and than we think.
I also believe there’s something strangely spiritual/transcendental about magnets AND many other attractions, which occur in the natural world.
I find this kind of discussion so refreshing. “Experts” will tell you that magnets do not perform any work because there’s no movement, and all what they are doing when holding an object against gravity is maintaining the stored potential energy in the field.
Years ago I was reading an article on a journal of wastewater treatment that dealt with the use of a magnetic field to create a gradient of densities within a paramagnetic fluid that then can be used for separation of plastics of different kind by their different density which makes them buoyant at different depths within the liquid column. It’s a clever way to solve this problem but from reading this article my mind drifted towards and became way more interested in the idea of using this phenomena by means of a permanent magnet to create a permanent flow within a paramagnetic liquid. This was around 2006 and of course after reading a lot I have all sorts of reasons why my idea will never work, and I have “learnt” a lot about magnetism and magnetic fields, yet, if you ask me, I still don’t know why my silly idea can’t ever work.
Gudday, Michael.
I can offer an explanation as to how magnets keep on working. I’ve been looking for self-consistent theories as to how the Universe works for 50 years now, and I believe I have one combining the works of Michael Mathis with the Plasma Cosmology/Electric Universe theories, held together by the glue of Per Bak (whose book “How Nature Works” I highly recommend everyone read). I’ve summarised this at https://thehonestscientist.com/, but here are the highlights relevant to this subject:
1. As per the insights of many ancient civilisations, the Universe is “stuff” (matter) and “not-stuff” (space). The latter has no properties apart from 3 dimensions (or 3 co-ordinates, depending on how you define dimensions).
2. As per the idea of atomos matter is ultimately simple – Miles’s model has indivisible incompressible spheres that are as small compared to an electron as an electron is to a town, which he has various names for include “charge field particles”. The base level particles just zip around at the speed of light, c, in straight lines.
3. Through collisions these charge field particles develop spins – not only axially, but also in the x, y and z dimensions (like Earth rotating around the Sun, and kind of like a gyroscope). For each “layer” of spin to be stable it results in the particle appearing to double in size and mass (hence quantisation). This “sea” of small particles is what some people call the “aether” and what others call the “fabric of space-time”; Miles calls it the “charge field”.
4. Once a particle builds up enough layers it’s jittering about so much that it can no longer move in a straight line at c, and it forms a kind of cage that can temporarily trap smaller particles. For larger particles with an outside “layer” of axial spin most of the smaller particle leave around the “equator” and enter via the “poles”. The smallest stable particle that does this we call the electron. A few more “layers” of spin and you get the proton. Due to its larger effective size more particles enter and leave protons, so when many protons and electrons are close the protons are pushing each other away faster due to a larger stream of particles, so it looks like they repel each other and in contrast attract the electrons – ergo the basis of charge, and the idea that like charges repel whereas unlike charges attract.
5. With a sufficient density or enough time protons and electron can line up along the poles to achieve a stable arrangement – ergo atoms. With even more density/time these atoms can line up in groups – ergo molecules, or bulk materials.
6. As atoms become larger with more protons and electrons they get more complex structures (not too dissimilar from the Structured Atom Model of Otte et al, but predating this). These different structures result in different flows of charge field particles and in bulk different properties – e.g. a large flow of charge field particles in one direction results in a (literal) current of electricity. Particles spinning around this current are what we measure as magnetism. Flows can also explain why in bulk certain elements are gaseous vs liquid vs solid, plus radioactivity and a heap of other properties.
I’ll stop at this level as we’re now at the point where we can explain persistent magnetism – the structure of certain elements such as iron result in flows of charge field particles that we call magnetism, especially when sizeable numbers of atoms are tweaked to line up. The magnetism is persistent as it is the result of the flow of charge particles – the iron atoms themselves are not really doing any work apart from determining the directions the much more abundant charge field particles travel – this is the wheelwork of nature that Tesla discussed; the constant flow of these charge field particles, that when harnessed in the appropriate fashion provide what we call energy, magnetism and many other things.
On a more philosophic note, this means that were are all interconnected, literally – statistically a small number of particles flowing through me are probably flowing through you a fraction of a section later as you read this, and through pretty much everything on Earth, and a few seconds later the Moon, a few minutes later the Sun, and so on. Happy to discuss further if interested.
On an entirely different note – I hope that you and the SAFIRE/Aureon team have been following the work of the MFMP – Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project, especially the YouTube videos of Bob Greenyer. As per his recent presentations they’ve good evidence to support the theory that charge separation (e.g. plasma double-layers in SAFIRE) result in plasmoids that in turn can produce large amounts of energy via transmutation of elements (especially Hydrogen, Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen).
Whilst this will most likely be the energy source of the future, they have found it is not without its dangers – several Russian experimenters have unexpectedly passed, and they believe this to be because during their experimentation some of the plasmoids passed through their bodies, transmuting bone, muscle and more on the way through. Whilst our body’s immune system and healing processes can handle some of this, depending upon where these plasmoids go they could result in serious illnesses like cancer, or even more immediate problems like strokes and heart attacks.
Furthermore, it appears that conventional shielding will NOT necessarily stop these plasmoids – they can pass through most materials virtually unhindered. He has been informed, however, of a form of layered protection that seems to work, incorporating thermal insulation, heat accumulation, radiation protection and a phosphor – for details see:
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/o-day-method-of-protection-from-strange#details
So could you please ensure that the SAFIRE/Aureon team are aware of the possible dangers and put in place suitable forms of protection if they are not already doing so. Presumably consumer devices et al that incorporate this technology in the future will also need some form of protective layering such as this incorporated into them.
Thanks for your time and I hope you find this useful.
Peter K. Campbell