[jerrygg38]

Once you said that BB demonstrated this to a large group of people, that to me means Con Game. the originator was trying to make money. You are just an innocent victim of this con game.  Jerrygg38

I AM the originator. 

I am sorry. All your associates are incompetant or ignorant or both. There is no other explanation. Alternatively you are the talking coconut person reincarnated. You just want to talk for the sake of talking. Sorry but if they cannot be blamed then it is your fault. Perhaps they do not exist. Both your first person had BB initials and the last person BB initials. Perhaps you made them both up.

Like I say.  Me you're entirely free to criticise.  If I cared about your opinion on this I might even put up a defense.

I just looked on the internet for JLN labs. Stepfan Harmann, JL Nardin, and Dieter Bauer plus Jean louis Naudin were listed. Are these your associates? Are you Jean Naudin???

  In any event I see they used an AC scope and warned not to ground anything for the test. This is cheating and quite a hoax.
  I do not know why the hoax. If it was not for money, was it only to have something to talk about?
  I am sorry to be rough but someone deliberately produced a hoax.

[jerrygg38]

Hay; [] you managed to get your reply outside the quotes that time.

The trouble is that I type 350 words per minute (some of the time) Perhaps the first letter!

[witsend (OP)]

Ok. Vern. To continue through this interminable plod.  I hope it doesn't put you to sleep.  I'm so sorry I have to describe this with words.  It's all I have.

Presumably thus far the model sort of conforms to measured reality - the final arbiter?  And yet I've introduced to our natural phenomena a heretofore never considered little zipon in a magnetic field that's also proposed as a primary force. I've tried to draw correspondence to the shape and structure and behaviour of natural phenomena conforming to some correspondence with the magnetic field including the fact that the atomic energy levels could be similar to the structure of our solar system.  But included in this bigger picture are also bigger energy levels that behave in similar ways.  A gross manifestation of the first smaller atomic field.

I also tried to draw a correspondence to the event of 'fire' as a similar event to a broken string of zipons in the greater vacuum of space unravelling to produce those extraordinary nebulae.

There are a whole lot of gaps.  One is the path of the orbit of planets - not fully justified.  And the other is the fact that nuclear fire appears to have different properties to flame.  Also not fully justified.  I hope to get back to these.

What I'd like to start moving towards is my definition of broken symmetry.  And before I do that I should try and explain the little curly things, the magnetic fields that are extraneous to atoms and yet bind these atoms.

If the atom is negatively ionised, then, for symmetry I propose that these extraneous binding fields are postively ionised - or that they spin in an opposite direction.  And vice versa.  This means that if any amalgam, such as battery acid comprises molecules or atoms or both, that are predominantly and inherently repulsive then they will compensate for this by finding an opposite spin.  The proposal is that - at the point of manufacture - these amalgams were bound by these extraneous fields.  They still reflect the imbalance of the atoms - but have reversed their justification to compensate.

This does nothing to change the potential of that imbalanced amalgam.  The fields are neutral.  It's just that the fields spin in the same direction as each other.  They have the same charge or justification.  So, inherently, all those fields actually repel each other.  Forever trying to move away.  It's closest analogy would be to a single magnetic monopole - but obviously - its actually only a single justification.  So these fields always reflect the valence condition of the atoms that they 'hold together'. They're still not detectable because they are essentially neutral.  And, in any event, they are operating outside our measurable dimensions.

The proposal is that magnetic fields always move towards a condition of balance or, I think you engineers refer to it as zero net charge.  In other words, in order to establish that balance they first need to change the justification of their spin so that one half of them spin in one direction and the other half spins in the other direction.  That's just because these little zipons need to do what all magnets do.  They want to balance.

If you look at the way permanent magnets move - if they want to change their justification they have to move the entire body of the magnet before they attach. They can't just 'reverse' their magnetic fields.  In the same way I'm proposing that the only way these little magnetic fields can change their direction is by moving through a full orbit in order to present an alternate charge or justification back to that imbalanced amalgam.  

Please let me know if this is clear - and then, I'll plod on.  

  

[Vern]

You seem to be self consistent so far; I guess that is all we should require of new ideas about how nature works. I can get the vision you are imagining, - explaining. 

[witsend (OP)]

That was really quick.  Thanks.  It'll take a while to get to the next step.  But I'll get there.

[Vern]

I usually read posts twice before I respond; sometimes this helps me avoid dumb responses; sometimes not. []

[witsend (OP)]

OK.  We've established that these amalgams may comprise magnetic fields that bind different materials.  In a resistive load I'm proposing that the imbalance in the atomic structure of iron or it's alloys also reflects this state.  The atoms are intrinsically imbalanced.  The magnetic fields are holding the atoms of the amalgam together, but they've arranged the atoms in a random pattern in order to minimise the 'charge imbalance' of the atoms in that amalgam.  The fact that the metal in a resistor is hard, in comparison to copper, for instance, is precisely because of this need to separate like atoms that have an inherently imbalanced condition.  And like the atoms in the liquid battery acid amalgam, these fields are still unipolar - or monodirectional.  They all share the same justification.  And, as in the battery amalgam, the actual charge or spin of the fields are opposing each other.

The copper wire is different.  Here the binding fields again reflect the valence condition of the copper atoms.  But copper does not have an imbalanced valence state.  It has I think it is 2 electrons in its outer energy level.  For symmetry their spin would balance out.  So all those extraneous fields have two justifications.  This is virtually a rest state or balanced state. And it allows for a more coherent crystalline structure.  And because there isn't any inherent repulsion, there is not the same degree of stiffness in the material of the copper itself.  It's more malleable.

That covers the most of the circuit components that allow for current conduction.



 

[Vern]

I can visualize the concept.

[witsend (OP)]

This is how the model proposes that current actually flows.

The zipons, being magnetic fields can only interact with other magnetic fields because they are the only particle within the boundary constraint of the other zipons.  Else there can't be an interaction.

In order to change their spin they orbit from the one terminal to the other through the medium of the magnetic fields of the circuit components.  To start with they interact with the magnetic fields in the copper wire.  This is a relatively easy passage. If their justification or charge is say, North, then they can interact, relatively easily, with the the copper's south zipons.  They interact by presenting say, their own north, thereby forcing the north of the binding fields to extrude from the material of the wire.  These supplanted fields then do what all magnetic fields do.  They orbit the structure of the wire.  They can't resist the force of the current flow because the potential difference at the source is far greater than any force they have.  These extruded fields are measured as a magnetic field.  And the force of the current is a direct measure of the force of that extruded field.  

But when the come to the magnetic fields in the resistive wire they hit a problem.  These fields only have 1 spin. In order to interact here, or to 'hitch a ride' so to speak, they can only interact with a field that essentially only has one justification.  

Still the current is the stronger force.  It is able to force the required number of extruded fields in the resistor to adjust its spin to the required south. The balance of the fields in that resistor move to compensate for this altered state.  Simultaneously the atoms, that were previously held apart are now exposed to each other's like charge.  The ensuing chaos is such that some of these extruded fields peel off as photons.  Others stay closer to the resistor's material to manifest as truants (as in the fire description).  And the only coherent field then becomes an extruded north field that is precisely a measure of the current flowing through the structure of that resistor.  This, over time, results in a weakening of the bound state of the resistor itself.

Then the current reaches the second terminal.  It has an altered spin - which was the thing that induced the circuit orbit in the first instance.  It presents an alternate charge to the battery amalgam.  And the spin is then able to adjust the positioning of the atoms and molecules in that amalgam exactly as these atomically extruded magnetic fields adjusted the positioning of the atoms in the resitor material.

EDIT So the current flow - in terms of the model is simply the movement of these magnetic fields to alter their justification.  They come from a source and go back to that source without losing any of those little zipons.  The only zipons that are lost to the structure are the the resistor's zipons.  These systematically decay as photons or truants and they then weaken the bound state of the resistor.

And if this is right, then if a circuit is designed to return some of these fields back to the terminal without changing their spin - then charge is conserved and the battery should - at its least - exceed its watt hour rating.

SECOND EDIT.  You do not have to agree with me.  Just let me know if the reasoning is still consistent.

[witsend (OP)]

Vern, I'm so wide awake.  It's been a holiday here in SA.  Youth day.  And our country takes its holidays very seriously.  So I've had about 6 hours interrupted to work on this thread.  EDIT What I'm trying to say is that on and off I've managed about 6 hours of writing.  And a glorious day.  Surprise break in the weather.  God's in His universe and all's well with the world - and so on.

The only blemish was the unfettered insults from sundry contributors.  Such malice.  I wish I knew what I could possibly have done to deserve that.  But I'm getting used to the extraordinary passions of the scientific mind.

Regarding your post in the OTHER THREAD for want of more specific reference - I realise that questioning is a critical part of the progress of science.  But questions are always a pleasure.  I welcome it.  Critical input is the best of all things.  I'm waiting for yours.  And I'm still not through the model.  But I think I've cracked the most of it.

Hope I entertained that lighning fast mind of yours.  I'll post tomorrow. I'm going to see if I can relax for a bit.  I'll never sleep unless I do.

[Vern]

I don't get the reasoning where you feel you can get more zipons back out of the restive inductor than you put into it. The inductive circuits I am familiar with will give a kick back of much higher voltage than the source voltage but voltage times current is a little less than the charging voltage times current. The kick back can happen in less time than the charging.

You seem to still be consistent.

[witsend (OP)]

I haven't really dealt yet with the inductive element in the cycle.  I see now this is the next plod.  But I'll definitely leave it until the moring - or I'm in for another night of - what my family call - buzzing.  I start and then don't seem to know how to stop.

Glad to hear it hasn't offended the logic.

I've been keeping my dogs quiet by feeding them marrow bones.  The floor looks like an archeological dig.  I must try and tidy up. 

Thank you Vern - for your input - the more so as it hasn't been destructive.

[witsend (OP)]

I don't get the reasoning where you feel you can get more zipons back out of the restive inductor than you put into it.  Vern.

These concepts are confusing because I'm forever describing the same thing at different values and levels.  For ease of reference I propose to draw some distinctions.  Let's say that the zippons from the battery acid amalgam can be the source zipon.  So current flow will relate to these zipons only.  In the same way the zipons in the copper wire are carrier zipons because they just open out to allow a path for that flow of current.  And the zipons in the resistor are the target zipons because that's where the work is done.

The target zipons, as in all solid amalgams, were introduced to that amalgam when the resistor was manufactured.  The proposal is that heat was transferred to a loose but unbound refined amount of iron and sundry alloys.  In terms of this model all heat is the result of extraneous fields of zipons in material, such as coal, coke, whatever, that have had their strings broken through applied friction.  This sets off a chain reaction where the strings of zipons unravel to manifest as truants. The truants have lost momentum but gained mass.  They then manifest as flames.  These flames or truants, in turn, now transfer their mass into the molten material.  They do this because it's their nature to form in fields and its their nature to extend their magnetic influence wherever they can in order to find a balance.  But when that material cools, all that happens is that the truants lose their mass, regain their momentum and they are then retained in that molten material of that iron alloy which is no longer loose but bound.

In effect, the zippons  that first bound the fuel, have simply found a way to disperse through space into a new medium and they now bind the iron alloy amalgam in the same way that they previously bound the carbon atoms or somesuch, in the first instance.  It's a transfer of energy and a physical transfer of the actual magnetic fields from one amalgam to another.

But the bound condition of the iron alloy is not a loose arrangement. The iron atoms in that amalgam, have an imbalanced charge because their outer energy levels have an imbalanced electron.  It means that every iron atom repels every other iron atom.  So.  During the process of cooling, those extraneous binding target zipons also have a sympathetic orbit to these atoms - but in anti phase to the atom.  But that also means that each extraneous orbit conflicts with every other orbit.  And therefore, during the process of cooling these fields arrange the atoms into some arrangement that minimises their own conflicting charge.  The crystalline structure of the iron amalgam is random to allow for this arrangement.  But it also means, that on a quantum level the arrangement is such that the extraneous target zipons have managed to position themselves, and their spins in such a way that they do entirely conflict.  They have a like spin or justification, but they have managed to adjust their positions to avoid a - head on confrontation, so to speak with juxtaposed extraneous target zipons.  The net result is that they have balanced their own charges and, in so doing neutralised that amalgam.

Sorry Vern.  I'll have to complete this in another post.  I think this is enough.  Please let me know when you've read this.  I'll press on in any event.

[Vern]

I read the last post a couple of times so far; I can't understand it well enough to even determine if it is consistent. I'll have to go through it a few more times.

[witsend (OP)]

I'm just so glad you're there.  I felt I was talking into a big black hole.

I'm only describing the known random positioning of atoms in an iron amalgam.  No coherent crystalline structure. Also tried to describe the transfer of zipons from one amalgam to another through the process of applied heat.

But read on.  I'm still working on your actual question.  The eternal difficulties of a dedicated plodder.

[witsend (OP)]

I think I may have lost you here.  The proposal is that fire is simply broken strings of extraneous fields of zipons that then manifest as truants.  Lost momentum - gained mass.  So.  When fire has burned out we are left with ashes or loosely bound carbon - or some such.  The extraneous magnetic fields or 'curly little numbers' have simply 'left the building' so to speak.  They've gone, and with their departure the remaining material that has been burned is a loose collection of unbound matter. (edit) Ash or smoke. The thing that previously held the structure together is no longer there. 

In the manufacture of iron - and in the same way - the flames that emanate from from the burning coal or coke or fuel (edit) causes the loss of the bound state of the coke/coal and moves these binding fields to the newly manufactured amalgam.

I've been saying this throughout.  Is this any clearer?

[Vern]

Well, I don't know; you seem to be proposing that combustion is something other than a chemical reaction. A familiar reaction is carbon + oxygen resulting in heat and carbon dioxide. Are you referring to the chemical kind of fire we know about? It kinda reminds me of the old earth, air, fire, and water scheme. []

[witsend (OP)]

Well, I don't know; you seem to be proposing that combustion is something other than a chemical reaction.

Actually, what I'm trying to point to is this is the 'thing' that causes the chemical reaction.  The proposal being that covalent bonding is actually just the interaction of these extraneous zipons that unravelled from the fuel, and then found a new home. 

So.  That chemical reaction is proposed to be initiated by the unravelling and redistribution of zipons through space.  Here's how this is proposed to take place.  Just as broken strings of zipons from the primary fields of space unravel into nebulae, so broken strings of extraneous fields in gross amalgams can unravel to form flames.  Flames are, therefore the sum of zipons that have lost their momentum and gained mass to become manifest in our own time frame.  The strings are broken due to applied friction or some such.  This sets off a chain reaction.

Having manifested - they then need to find a 'new home'.  Therefore they move through space on an 'exploration trip' - so to speak.  Some of them find - say -  2 oxygen  atoms and some carbon from the smoke.  And they then form carbon dioxide.  Others can find - for instance - types of silicones and form the crystalline lattice of glass and such like.  Some of these zipons find partners and spin off as photons. Still others simply decay as virtual particles to slot into the strings that form the big magnetic field of the earth. 

But when they leave their 'previous abodes' so to speak, they leave behind them unbound atoms that were previously bound and shaped by them.  The waste product that results from this is ash - carbon dioxide - photons - whatever.

The model proposes that when coke, coal, fuel of any type burns - the actual 'flame' is the result of the redistribution of these binding fields into new forms of bound matter.  Any covalent condition is the fusion of atoms by these binding fields.

In the same way when these flames are exposed to a loose collection of iron atoms they are able to move as a flame, through space,  and recongregate among the atoms of that loose amalgam.  And then, in turn, they can reconstitute the condition of that loose amalgam into a solidly bound amalgam.  They have moved from the material of the fuel and simply transferred their binding abilities from the fuel to the material of the iron.  And some have moved out of the field to become photons.  And others have found a pair of conveniently placed oxygen atoms to form them into carbon dioxide. And so on.

In effect the zipons are the medium through which matter is constituted or manufactured.

So.  Again, the zipons in the field are cold, fast and small and when those fields unravel they become hot, slow and big in a precise but inverse ratio.  We see that hot, slow, big condition as fire.  So I am proposing that this is the actual property of fire.  We are looking at truants that have become manifest inside our dimensions.

When they 'find their new home' so to speak then they lose their properties of heat, slowness and mass to revert to their earlier condition of cold, fast and small to operate outside our measuring dimensions.  They become the 'curly little things' that orbit atoms inside amalgams.  They've found a new abode.  They're just there but no longer visible.  We cannot pick up a charge, because they're balanced.  We cannot find them because they're moving too fast and they're way too small.  But it is proposed that they are, nonetheless, the thing that shapes that amalgam into an identifiable object.

So in effect I'm proposing that this is the foundation for all chemical reactions that are caused by fire.  Fire is still a chemical reaction.  The model suggests that it may simply be a different expression of a zipon when it is reconstituting its position in space.  Moving on, so to speak.  To the best of my knowledge this also does not conflict with your 'final arbiter'.  It's a broad brushstroke of how the model proposes zipons form our observable universe - but as an invisible background structure.

And it also has the required balance.  Here it's the perfect conservation of energy which has simply changed matter from one form to another form.  This is excepting those zipons that decayed.  But as they would only return to the broader containing magnetic field from whence the probably originated, then, here too is a total conservation of mass, and charge.
   


 

[Vern]

I think I understand a little better. Your image starts with zipons in an invisible place and they become visible when they somehow are ejected from a structure of zipons moving at 2c. Flame is a different expression of a zipon, we could call it a state of zipons. We see this state as flame.

[witsend (OP)]

I think I understand a little better. Your image starts with zipons in an invisible place and they become visible when they somehow are ejected from a structure of zipons moving at 2c. Flame is a different expression of a zipon, we could call it a state of zipons. We see this state as flame. Vern

Hi Vern.  SORT OF.  Flame is a truant.  Remember the photon.  Two truants meeting across the GREAT DIVIDE?  The vacuum of space?  That photon was made from 2 truants - one too big and one too small?

If you recall?  Then in the same way - we have an unravelled string - exactly the same thing, but much much smaller.  This string sits between atoms in wood? fuel, coke - whatever.  These are zipons.  Friction causes a break in the string. The zipons unravel, collapse into each other.  They become bigger slower or smaller faster.  We only see the bigger slower truants.  We see them literally as flame.

If you get this, then perhaps you could read the previous post again and see if it makes better sense.

Glad your there.