A magnet is able to deform space toward its regions of high concentration (either pole), and away from its radial body, inverse of the deformations experienced by a current carrying wire pulled longitudinally, and compressed radially. In the case of a wire, the magnetic action is transverse to the length of the wire. Magnetic Action, is defined as the convergences of Flux (m2) with Charge (kg/s). Given surface integration, the geometry recommended seems a pancake coil, very thin wire, very tightly wound. Alternatively, an iron rod placed to deform under flux, providing mass, and coherence, shall find good results; but a long narrow air coil shall do poorly as an magnet (as the turn effects scale against length). Iron filings exhibit line like behavior, as they are drawn to each other longitudinally, and repelled radial, same as the magnet; in my judgement there are no field lines exiting one pole and entering another. Field line-like behavior is emergent to anisotropic forces acting upon the space between materials capable of magnetic interaction.
>>16859609The universe is electromagneticLight waves are a somewhat understood and accepted element of ElectromagnetismBut I strongly suspect Gravity is directly related but it is one thing that has not been explained in the public domain how it is connected
Magnetism and Gravity are similar in ways that make it seem they are two sides of the same coin so to speak
also, here's some coffee housemaids
>"OP force fed a bunch of physics terminology into an LLM and let it shit out another theory of everything" thread #46,211
>>16859624If you're not able to discuss the matters, just move along.
Sorry, my formal training is in computer science, and philosophy.>>16859624They are my own schizo ideas, tappy tapped by my own fingers, my conclusions of iron filings, Ampere's Law, Hall Effect, Stern/Gerlach, and CRT warping by a magnet....And not a theory of everything, but only of EM while not considering its propagation in space... Which is fringe and useless.Here are my notes on stern/gerlach. I don't really think a conception of spin is useful anymore.across both north and south poles, charge (mass flow, kg/s) is drawn inward toward a pole with no preference (stern-gerlach)- such deflection to one pole, should resolve to a clean dot, even without spin, across finite conditions.... (the boundary between polarities is infinitesimally thin, it will deflect to one, the discrete outcome might be of geometric origin, a trajectory failing to straddle a boundary)- you are not able imo to straddle an infinitesimal boundary with a finite spatial effect, so they deflect to one or the other immediately, and the precision of the hit dots, will be determined by the initial precision of the beam....>>16859617IDK what I would think of gravity. I'm not even interested in it as a unique force... Partly because I don't believe in particles having kinetic motion of their own, I think they excite space around them into flowing motion and ride it.I think physicists interpret GR, incorrectly, from an ontological stance. It's simpler to have one substrate of motion (space), rather than world lines, particles, geodesics. Frame dragging imo arises out of vortical shearing, and no forces are felt in free fall as you are riding an accelerating volume of space into matter, whatever matter is.
>>16859617I kinda want, a geometric understanding of my own existence... and a lot of theories seem so.... Culty, dogmatic.... Abstracted. No good, even if the math works, mathematics may partition the world along any arbitrary lines as long as the relationships are coherent, but, that doesn't help you see the world for how it is, it still requires interpretation, much of which is either not attempted or hand waved as not worth it.>>16859624I have no more maids, only beaver......
>>16859616Like, gravity as a concept, shouldn't be required for reality, if you consider every particle to be its own warp drive; distorting, deforming, and sending space into motion. Every hard item is its own inertial frame, as every item is never in fundamental motion; the motion is relational, relative to other items, and that relational change in volume between objects can be reified into a literal flowing space; if you wish to partition it vacuum, spacetime, ether, aether, dark energy; the useful substrate imo is spatial deformation.
>>16859609presuming a most rudimentary explanation of gravity might be "mass attracts mass".what is "mass" but a compound structure of atomic particles.? (for purposes of immediate conversation I hope to leave quarks and such out of this but that may not be a realistic approach)what are atomic particles most basic properties?an electromagnetic chargeNow we might remember and insist that mass/weight is one property of atomic structure and electrical particle charge is another atomic property entirely.But isn't it quite curious.? My point, dear fellows, is still that magnetism, electrical charge, and gravity seem to share some inseparably similar behaviors.
>>16859650>gravity as a concept, shouldn't be required for reality,So are you proposing that our "concept" of Gravity, is merely a name we have applied to a set of behaviors which are simply part of some other first principle operations that account for and cause all the effects we like to attribute to this thing we call gravity? if we are going to renegotiate terms and definitions altogether thins could become a slippery discussion indeed.And what of "Time"? is this also a matter of question?
>>16859656I would define charge now as the square root of a convergence between inertia and current. kg * kg/s2. My OP is also only on Magnetic Action, not on Gravity, or the conjugate I still need to reason about (Dielectric Action).I have a note with ideas on inertia, but I'm really sure how accurate my summaries are...Inertia (Resistive to Evolution)Charge (Active in Evolution)Current (Inducive of Evolution)Anistropy?Inertial - Stasis <> MotionCharge - Motion <> AxialCurrent - Axial <> ????>what are atomic particles most basic properties?volume, surface, space, angles, magnitudes.Phase in my hierarchy, (m2/s2), where Voltage^2 = Flux * Phase, would be a Phasor as primitive, evolving in angle and magnitude across time.I think it might contribute to the clockwise/counter-clockwise rotations that charged particles experience in magnetic fields as they're drawn toward the poles, but I'm not sure what the coherent view for the phenomena is.(Hall Effect / CRT Warping)south rotates negative bias (-V) counter-clockwisesouth _should rotate_ positive bias (+V) clockwisenorth rotates negative (-V) bias clockwisenorth _should rotate_ positive (+V) bias counter-clockwise
>>16859666>the conjuring of Digits no lessHhhmmm,...Much to ponder,.. very much
>>16859659>So are you proposing that our "concept" of Gravity, is merely a name we have applied to a set of behaviors which are simply part of some other first principle operations that account for and cause all the effects we like to attribute to this thing we call gravity?To me, t's easier to visualize it as flowing space, than a field force, emergent out of the fluid dynamics of space.>And what of "Time"? is this also a matter of question?Future space flows. Future time is.Past space is. Past time flows.As for the present, I have no clue.The present slips away in one's fingers, and still we're here, always and only ever here looking at both the past and future, faces of our present being.But for math, I interpret s^degree, as the evolution of that many degrees of spatial axes, if those spatial axes are visible in present space or not, doesn't really matter.A spatial axis evolves, and I see its divergence in the evolution of a clock, be it sand falling or an hour hand. I would consider clocks measuring the spatial divergence of some axis, as time. Or if you hold that coordinate to be constant, the the divergence of the other coordinates. For 3 space, 1 time; 3 static (space) while 1 flows (time), could be viewed as 3 evolving (space) while 1 is static (time).... But gravity as a force, kg*m/s2; the inertia and the distance are both evolving, the evolution of the distance becomes inertially evolving in time, biasing for more evolution of the distance. Maybe.But the ideas in my head are highly tangled, which is why I'm here trying to write them out, for the critique by others. I'll babble like a baby, if its for 1 year, 2 years, more; until my head is coherent. Whatever the language of reality is.
>>16859609OP have you ever read Velikovsky?I'm not suggesting he has the answers. But he has some very interesting observations somewhat related.One of the proposed theories coming from his studies is the idea of the "Electric Universe"Where the entire universe sort of acts like one big massive point-to-point electrical circuitry.Here's a presentation given by Wallace Thornhill talking about some of it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gouqy4OghyY
>>16859828One of Emanual Velikovsky's most well known books is titled "Worlds in Collision"
>>16859828Velikovsky and EU are tard-tier - if you dig deep enough it's just the same new age biblical doomsday cult magic horseshit every other pseudointellectual of the last 100 years has tried peddling. The only difference is the horseshit is dressed up in plasma physics and celestial mechanics instead of crystals and kool aid.
>>16859846actual surface-level retard detected
>>16859846"Doomsday" has nothing to do with it, your a reactionary idiot
>>16859852>>16859854>all of the major catastrophe's in the biblical and pre-biblical mythologies were actually caused by close encounters with rogue planets that then magicked themselves into stable orbits via electric forces from stars! you just don't get it, bro! this is like, super legit science! like, for real!>>>/x/ is that way, faggots
>>16859858asymmetric capacitors, would have to have the standing wave wiggling more on one side....(0V ground) (-V plate) ,(0V plate), (0V) ground; the first node (+0V), is compressed into the plate (+0V), the +V antinode is essentially ground, the middle node (-1/2V?), the -V antinode (-V at plate), the 3rd node (-1/2V)that's a weird layout compared to 0, +V, 0, -V, 0.... 0, +0, -1/2, -1, -1/2.... would lead to an extra tail to reach 0V; right? a quarter wave is in effect removed from the front, now present in the tail this type of propulsion, if it works, would be dead simple? far from some exotic bubble, its a standing wave that isn't centered on your device, offset instead? that particles are never in motion; they always deform space.... which is an amusing thought...
>>16860407hm...might, (kg/s) be a linear evolution where (kg) is a constant constrain; the linearly (constrained) evolution of distance, momentum.the constantly constrained velocity.or in the case of gravity (kg/s2 * m), current * distance.the elliptically constrained evolution of distance.the linearly constrained evolution of velocity.
I have decided on new names.Charge shall be Shift.Current shall be Impel.
tesla's egg of columbus, was it attraction or repulsion?it should be attracted to N/S, the openings of the coil, but that's a loopand a magnet should expel repulsion at the equatorand it stands up straight, to get away from the coilspositrons, electrons, they both attract to the poles; they curve/deflect in different directions, but they're consistently attracted to higher field stressif you can spin a magnetic field, N/S on a horizontal, the vertical axis of the equator should repel chargesif you have charged air, it should then be dispersed to the sides of the deviceyou'd encounter less of a push from above, but also less support from belowyour inertia should be decreased in the vertical axis, but increased in the horizontal planes.ah. what a beautiful idea if it had truth to it.
>>16862158equator of repulsion... a test of this, checking a high amperage coil.... not for differences in mass based on orientation, but differences in displacement given an equal force... testing for the perpendicular repulsion between field lines of maxwell's stress tensor, in more orthodox terms. if you hit/shove it from the side, it should displace further, than if you hit/shove it from the open poles... though air resistance might present a problem.... but that can be solved electrostaticly I assume.nation-state-actors-pls-hire-me-ig
