![Image](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CT0Uq1aWsAAEmPF.jpg)
Magnetic field through a ferrocell which appears to have "orbitals", but are in fact just fields, not particles in orbit
![Image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/vGfBxdJ4fjk/hqdefault.jpg)
And perhaps what they assume is a particle, is a compact wave packet
![Image](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Wave_packet_%28dispersion%29.gif)
BC's are actually extended vortices (screws), which Appear as concentric cylinders when plotted head-on or cross-sectioned.Webbman wrote: we know even birkland currents have a generally fixed width when observed in space and this is because they are electromagnetic cylinders ...
...
both electrons and photons which are the same thing with a different shape are required to be discrete units to avoid the requirement for bridges to transfer their energy.
I agree they are screws or helical forms but cylinders is their general shape for simplicity. If you take a bundle of cat6 and twist it straight the cat 6 will actually lose its resistance to outside interference. The twist in its design gives it special properties. Same model for light in my view its just that light is more extreme and basic. You do see my point that twisting even wires can give it special properties ie can make it immune to interference etc.seasmith wrote:BC's are actually extended vortices (screws), which Appear as concentric cylinders when plotted head-on or cross-sectioned.Webbman wrote: we know even birkland currents have a generally fixed width when observed in space and this is because they are electromagnetic cylinders ...
...
both electrons and photons which are the same thing with a different shape are required to be discrete units to avoid the requirement for bridges to transfer their energy.
...
Agreed, both e and p are the same function, with different scale of forms.
This image does not show the magnetic field.ArcherSage wrote: Magnetic field through a ferrocell which appears to have "orbitals", but are in fact just fields, not particles in orbit
![]()
Very nice approach. Terms such as "particle" (the idea), and what the post points out as the ability "to phase through something else" via resonance seem also to lend to interpretive ideas of these "foci" ("the state or quality of having or producing ... definition" or volumetric extension) also having the ability to 'transduce'. Webolife's "centroid" also has interpretive bearing imho. Perhaps the work of:ArcherSage wrote:Yes, how does electromagnetic radiation (waves) penetrate solids? Because it isn't made of particles, and neither is what it penetrates. Rather the wavelengths allow it to phase through something else depending on the other objects resonance. It does not make sense that particles are going through particles. You can measure what you think are electron activity, but they only have things attributed to electrons..such as EMR, or static discharge etc, none of these things are proof of a particle, simply proof of energy
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests