The origin of magnetic fields (Video)

The origin of magnetic fields
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlpyXhSb78s&feature=youtu.be

Hi, you guys. I had trouble logging in a few times earlier this year. I found that I used the wrong username.

I got an email from Jean de Climont in late February which I just read today. He sent the above link. I looked through the video and transcribed parts of it below. Looks like it may be a major finding for the mainstream to help move it in a better direction. These excerpts seem impressive, though not exactly correct as regards the charge field etc.

"The motion of electrons is not the cause of the magnetic field of electric currents. The own magnetic field of electrons has a rotational structure and is the one and only cause of the magnetic field of electric currents. ... The consequence of de Climont's experiment is that the Maxwell-Ampere equation is false. The magnetic field of an electric current is equal to the geometric sum of the magnetic moments of the electrons in the conductor. ...

Since Hertz's electromagnetic equation is undulatory, Maxwell immediately thought that light is therefore electromagnetic in itself. The aim of the positivists, including Maxwell, was to find mathematical equations for all the phenomena of Nature. So the problem seemed to be solved. But there was another serious problem. The Maxwell-Hertz equation is based on the belief that magnetic fields result from the motions of electrons. This equation is therefore not invariant in a Galilean reference frame change. But as we have just seen, this is not the case. Speed plays no part. The problem [issue?] of relativity does not therefore exist at all. ... Unfortunately for the relativists, [our correcting] the absurd equations of Maxwell [makes it] possible to come back to a medium in space carrying waves such as light, the aether. So Descarte was right [?]. Gravitation and light are carried by the same medium. This is the famous theory of whirlpools. ...

An atom that moves very rapidly in the medium of space is flattened and therefore has a wavelength modified in addition to the Doppler effect. The electrons cannot rotate around the nuclei of atoms without their drag in the medium of space dropping them. ... After the ejection of an electron, the nucleus can eject another electron, only with a different energy, its mass having changed. This explains the Pauli principle of exclusion. The particles of space condense in the nuclei of atoms. Atomic nuclei grow with time."

The last part seems compatible with John Kierein's model rather than Miles, but what about the earlier parts? They seem compatible with Miles' model. Right?

Close, but Miles would say that it is the photons doing all of the real work and the electrons are just along for the ride.

This may be a good stepping stone between the mainstream go-to chant "Electrons do everything!" to Miles' chant "Photons do most of it!"

.
Hi Lloyd, I agree with Nevyn. The photons do all the work and the electrons got all the glory, see electricity. I see no value in exploring exotic electron theories.

I must say, the audio in this video is truly awful. Thanks for the transcription even if it doesn't help make it any more intelligible to me. The mixed or chopped mechanical voice soundtrack, steady stream of hodgepodge ideas, and even the Youtube video post itself seem like something created by an AI.

We may be too late.
.

LongtimeAirman wrote:I must say, the audio in this video is truly awful. Thanks for the transcription even if it doesn't help make it any more intelligible to me. The mixed or chopped mechanical voice soundtrack, steady stream of hodgepodge ideas, and even the Youtube video post itself seem like something created by an AI.

That would be an "AS", as the lovely author Vonda McIntyre explained to us in the early 90s. "Artificial Stupid".

When there's nothing intelligent about a program, it's silly to refer to it as an AI. It's a marketing ploy, just like almost anything sold to us as "quantum" these days. Present company excluded on that, of course.

An aside, she writes some pretty gangster-shit. "Transition" was my favorite:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/855587.Transition

I was trying to understand which photons are causing the magnetic fields that are sometimes detected around electrons. Would it be photons emitted by the electrons, or photons in the photon stream that the electrons are riding in? As usual, I think I need to see a simulation. The images in my mind are too mixed up to follow well for now. Or maybe a simple logical argument would suffice.

I agree about AS. Miles wrote a paper on his conspiracy site saying Google's bragging about its AI developments are probably just bluff and hype. He analyzed the moves made by Google's AI and their competitor in a chess game and showed that the competitor took a dive, making several ridiculous moves. They were likely paid off by Google.

.
The video was too distracting to listen too.

I have the answer to your "magnetism about a wire" question from my notes this morning. Consider it a simple explanation.

All the constituent atomic matter comprising the wire - including the electrons - are emitting up or down B-photon fields. In other words, the B-photons may have X,Y, and Z spins. The Z spins are the pre-magnetic component. Those B-photon emissions are increased as voltage is applied. Here on Earth we have 2:1 matter/antimatter ratio. The +/- B-photons cancel much of the spins, the result is the magnetic field.  
.

Nice to see you back, Lloyd. We were wondering what happened!

I think that the electron's magnetic field isn't much different from the proton's, only smaller/less powerful as a result of the smaller scale. 1/1821st, I believe.

This video is pretty rough, you might have seen it in another thread, but it's an example of the charge field at the atomic level. An illustration, kinda. Maybe it will help though it's not directly focused on electron magnetism. But I tried to show the particles "swimming" almost in a sea of charge, and the electron's contribution is the blue/purple volumes. Don't mind the ratios too much (since they're wrong) but the concept might help.



https://vimeo.com/208245448