The Non Linear Plasma Reactor

[Simon]

It's about time this research stops...  I refuse to stay silent any longer.

After years of working on this, I was admitted to the board and tasked with evaluating the instability of the potential energy traps that were capturing the particles used for determining the accuracy of the wave functions we had been using for predicting the vortex's initial behavior.  What we discovered early on was that the uncertainty of the inter-particle collisions had been heavily influenced by the lack of coherence within the apparatus resulting from gravitational waves emanating from black hole collisions in deep space.  It was, in essence, the uncertainty principle working against us, but influenced not by our measurements, but by the interaction of our particles with existing waves travelling through space.  We thought we were beat until one of our colleges suggested using a technique similar to interferometry, but rather than a straight line, passing the incident photons through a spinning gas medium of varying density utilizing a circular refractive path that effectively extended the distance traveled well beyond what would be practical in a linear accelerator, but in a space small enough to essentially eliminate the effects of the passing gravitational waves. 

As our testing continued, it was determined that the tests themselves had been affecting gravity on a minute level in the vicinity of the apparatus, presumably due to the extreme compression of the ions coupled with their extreme spin velocity in the plasma, and that these seemingly inconsequential changes were acting upon the human body in a detrimental way that has yet to be understood nor investigated.  In particular, it was noted that everyone involved in these particular experiments were suffering from migraines and symptoms associated with the early onset of dementia, none of which have completely gone away.  When my team reported these findings, we were immediately terminated and reminded of our confidentiality agreements, to which I can only say, humanity is more important than money ever will be...

The name of a company can change, but truth doesn't go away.

He could call himself Theranos

[Nonlinearplasma]

He could call himself Theranos

I assume you need more time to figure out the difference between the poles of a magnet?

Did you see this graphic? it might help you understand the 3 dimensional nature of the universe.

P.s. i only added the txt, i believe the orginal image was done by NASA, notice the helical trajector of the magnetic wave. If the term magnetic wave is to much technical jargon for you i suggest listening to the great eric laithwaite talking, he was one of the greatest EE since probably Tesla. I stole the term from him, he sometimes uses magnetic river, which is also a good description of the phenomenon. He has great lectures on yt if you actually want to understand electromagnetism.

[Nonlinearplasma]

Here is another NASA image, notice the direction of current in relation to the ion direction.

The same process happens inside the toroid, plasma particles go 1 direction, while the wave current goes the opposite way. When the trajectory is 1.1° we have ourselfs a self sustaining superconducting toroid.

Sorry im trying to use simple terminology, it is hard and i know they are big words but they are still easily understood and well defined.

I once asked a plasma physicist to define charge to me, he said that which is non neutral. Image using the measurement scale to define something. Can any of you do better? How would you define charge?

[Simon]

 
 

[bd139]

Here is another NASA image, notice the direction of current in relation to the ion direction.

The same process happens inside the toroid, plasma particles go 1 direction, while the wave current goes the opposite way. When the trajectory is 1.1° we have ourselfs a self sustaining superconducting toroid.

Sorry im trying to use simple terminology, it is hard and i know they are big words but they are still easily understood and well defined.

I once asked a plasma physicist to define charge to me, he said that which is non neutral. Image using the measurement scale to define something. Can any of you do better? How would you define charge?

Can you please use the non simple terminology then. I think we can cope with it.

I mean throw some mathematics on the table. If I remember you can embed LaTeX in the forum.

[tszaboo]

Do you have a functional prototype?
No? I guess the Star Trek technical manuals contain better physics information than these posts. FYI real physicist worked on those to make sure that the technical info in it is up to date, and then they added the technobabble to it.

[Gyro]

It seems to me that you need to go and find a forum of more gullible people. You're not even holding your own in the Dodgy Technology scam section. 

[Nonlinearplasma]

Do you have a functional prototype?
No? I guess the Star Trek technical manuals contain better physics information than these posts. FYI real physicist worked on those to make sure that the technical info in it is up to date, and then they added the technobabble to it.

This has been previously stated. Try reading prior posts please.

[mnementh]

I tried. I couldn't get through more than half a page because .

mnem

[Nonlinearplasma]

It seems to me that you need to go and find a forum of more gullible people. You're not even holding your own in the Dodgy Technology scam section. 

I figured coulomb's law would be a well understood principle in this forum. Whats is difficult about parallel currents attract and anti parallel currents repel?

Do you understand opposites attracting and like poles repelling? I assume you understand what the dot inside the circle means and the cross inside the circle means?. It is fairly common method of showing current direction in the 3rd dimension on a flat piece of paper. Remember the electron wants to travel with a trajectory of 1.1° as shown by the magic angle research. Now apply this absolutely basic concept to the flight trajectory of 2 plasma particles. Since both particles are said to be charged the same forces are at work. Or do you claim the Positive and negative charges dont follow the same laws?

[Nonlinearplasma]

Can you please use the non simple terminology then. I think we can cope with it.

I mean throw some mathematics on the table. If I remember you can embed LaTeX in the forum.

I throw the math on the table. What is difficult about understanding the energy under a wave peak in 3 dimensions has no negative to the central axis of rotation. I uploaded a picture explaining this at the very start. I will upload a different 1 this time with less info on it to make it easier to see.

Ask yourself does the magnetic field sine wave and electric field sine wave share a common axis?

Obviously since the mag field and elect field are perpendicular to each other and therefore they do share a common axis. The problem is these 2 dimensional waves are measuring a 3 dimensional wave in a 3 dimensional universe. Claiming this is not true is the equivalent of saying the earth is flat to me.

So as we can see any 3 dimensional wave peaks energy value only oscillates to the outside observer. The central axis observer does not have the ability to view a negative mathimatical value in either x or y axis.

In order to mathimatical cordinate a 3D wave the CNC system should be employed. Its fairly basic and works well since we can cut helical augers for screw compressors for example. If maxwells system was employed to do the same job we would need a supercomputer just to cut an inch along the z axis. The z axis is the central axis. Maxwell used degress to measure this axis. Even although its clearly a distance measurement that is commonly measured in nanometers. The term wavelength should confirm this.

In electromagnetism we say that the positive and negative components of a wave cancel out around the central axis. Unfortunately this is not the reality for plasma (or electromagnetism since it also operates in 3 dimensions), this is why we call the merging of 2 peaks loops and nodes depending on the phase the waves are in as they meet. The energy level of the wave is never opposite to the peak in the trough. It is just less energy, or more energy. This is the failure of using the negative mathimatical value to measure sinusoidal waves. Hope this helps you.

[Gyro]

This reminds be of Professor Eric Laithwaite falling into the trap of believing Alex Jones's ill-conceived reactionless gyroscopic drive idea. He was a great and inventive man (maglev) and it screwed his career.

[AndyBeez]

@nonlinearplasma This is not a project for a garage start up. Yes you want to change the world but to do that and, to attract serious investors, your project requires peer review by at least one major academic institution. May I suggest you go back to uni and master in electromagnetodynamics, or similar. As a PhD student, you will have access to hardware resources that no start up could find on ebay, plus have the expertise of the physics community to call upon. Then, when investors line up, they will have confidence in the projects true potential. And you'll have someone to pay the electricty bill from making all of that plasma.

@simon You know what to do.

[Nonlinearplasma]

This reminds be of Professor Eric Laithwaite falling into the trap of believing Alex Jones's ill-conceived reactionless gyroscopic drive idea. He was a great and inventive man (maglev) and it screwed his career.

I would disagree that it screwed his career, the man was a genius. It just takes the rest a long time to catch up. We are still trying to catch up to tesla genius too.

As for the gryoscope, it is rotating inside a magnetic field. Like any conductor rotating inside a magnetic field, a current is induced. We generally call them eddy currents. That is why Eric could swing that heavy weight over his head like it was nothing. The current produces a magnetic field which makes the flywheel levitate every so slightly. As proven by Sandy Kidds invention.

[Gyro]

So you believe in reactionless gyroscopic drive too? 

... and it (precession) is nothing to do with magnetic fields.

[bd139]

I throw the math on the table.

That wasn't mathematics. I didn't see a vector, a tensor, an integral or a proof anywhere.

There is an understanding framework that these ideas are communicated in that you have not attempted to utilise.

I suspect if you attempt to apply it to the problem rather than the abstract ramblings, it will bring you back to reality as harshly as you need to be brought back.

[AVGresponding]

If you expect the answers to star formation and magnetic changes to be easily understood, then someone would have done it already.

This sentence, such as it is, makes no sense. Star formation and "magnetic changes" are very different subjects. The broad strokes of either are, in fact, quite easily understood. Hence, someone has done it already.

They arent different subjects, again you havent did your homework. Stars are formed by plasmoids. Gravitional collapse had no mechanism, and for that reason we couldnt even model it.

Magnetic changes that occur during solar min and solar max are definently not understood, saying so is mind blowing given the fact NASA say it is "ongoing research"  on their website and again have no mechanism for the process, hence the lack of a working model. The same can be said of the tidal and weather models. Ive sailed 20000nm and halfway around the world , dont bother telling me the tidal model is correct. Every sailor in the sourthern hemisphere knows about NZ. Hint thats where the model fails so badly even the avg joe knows about it. I can give you the name of a sailing school to ask if you wish.

The famous saying goes, it does not matter who you are if the model doesnt match reality you are wrong. They had to add dark matter for a reason, the funny thing is superconducting plasma is dark, since its perfect trajectory of 1.1° around an axis produces zero vibrations, aka electromagnetic waves.

Have you seen the research into the magic angle? Remember they told you that a "spinning charged particle of mass" aka the electron travels in a straight line inside a conductor, yet superconductivity requires a 1.1° trajectory. I would assume knowledge like that would interest EE's. Might be worth asking why it has a trajectory of 1.1° next time.

In fact gravitational collapse is the current mainstream understanding of how stars form. Yes, magnetic influences have a part to play after the initial stages, but they are not the main factor by any stretch of the imagination.

Dark matter and dark energy are needed for other cosmological reasons, nothing to do directly with star formation.

Talk pseudo-science here and you will get called out.

[Nonlinearplasma]

@nonlinearplasma This is not a project for a garage start up. Yes you want to change the world but to do that and, to attract serious investors, your project requires peer review by at least one major academic institution. May I suggest you go back to uni and master in electromagnetodynamics, or similar. As a PhD student, you will have access to hardware resources that no start up could find on ebay, plus have the expertise of the physics community to call upon. Then, when investors line up, they will have confidence in the projects true potential. And you'll have someone to pay the electricty bill from making all of that plasma.

@simon You know what to do.

Are you begging the ministry of truth to silence all debate. No wonder the world cant progress. Im an engineer. The peer review process is not designed for engineers, we have what is called the patent process. No decent engineer would admit to having peers that arent other engineers. We built the world.

Look above at the names. James Watt, Tesla, Eric Laithwaite. All engineers and all with a massive impact on the world we live in. Thats not to say physicists dont contribute, but i would say engineers contribute a considerable amount more.

I agree the peer review process would add credibility, and i figured i would give the engineers a chance first. Disappointed they had the same attitude to the astrophysics forums. It would be nice to see inquisitive questions, instead of very poor insults. Like not even funny insults.

Im surprised no one asked about superconductivity here, esp when the trajectory has been found clear as day and shown to you by me and acedemia.

Close it if you want, i have lost nothing. I still own my patent.

[Nonlinearplasma]

]

In fact gravitational collapse is the current mainstream understanding of how stars form. Yes, magnetic influences have a part to play after the initial stages, but they are not the main factor by any stretch of the imagination.

Dark matter and dark energy are needed for other cosmological reasons, nothing to do directly with star formation.

Talk pseudo-science here and you will get called out.

Can anyone explain the mechanism for gravitional collapse to you. Why does it suddenly happen?

Are you claiming plasmoids do not form in the magnetotail? Again i will include the illustration. Showing you where they form. Is there any observational evidence to suggest that the plasmoid forms in the same place that moon, planet or star orbits its parent object.

What would it take for planets to form? Does gravitational collapse create perfect spheres with a poloidal axis and magnetic field for them 2?

The only pseudoscience is that of the ppl adding to the theory long after the orginal idea had been disproven. One of the fathers of electrical engineering (Tesla) said Einstein was a crackpot. I tend to respect tesla due to his contribution and the fact he was alive at the same time and i wasnt.

[Nonlinearplasma]

I throw the math on the table.

That wasn't mathematics. I didn't see a vector, a tensor, an integral or a proof anywhere.

There is an understanding framework that these ideas are communicated in that you have not attempted to utilise.


I suspect if you attempt to apply it to the problem rather than the abstract ramblings, it will bring you back to reality as harshly as you need to be brought back.

So the negative value of energy of the wave in 3 dimensions. What should we do with it when it reaches a second axis of rotation. The waves around a toroid or coil can only cancel out to the axis they themselfs are rotating around. The second polodial axis is not the central axis to the wave. How should we measure the negative value when it reaches that axis?

[AVGresponding]

Does gravitational collapse create perfect spheres with a poloidal axis and magnetic field for them 2?

Does your theory explain the formation of planets that have no magnetic field? And what, perfect spheres? What perfect spheres?

Tesla was a genius. He was also well known for wasting other people's money on impractical pseudo-science projects, and in modern times would likely have extracted large amounts of money from gullible people using crowd funding sites, with predictable results.

Science works because theories can be empirically tested, which is why Einstein's theories are still accepted (they are not yet disproved), and Tesla's wireless power transmission continues to exist only in the minds of those who don't understand the maths.



You have been asked more than once to show us your mathematical workings out, but instead you prefer to show CG images of magnetic fields. Until you can provide some actual maths, no-one here will take anything you say seriously.

[BU508A]

No mathematics in sight, only meaningless graphics and gibberish writing.

Still no vectors, tensors, matrices or differentials.
Not to speak of Maxwell equations.

[Nonlinearplasma]

No mathematics in sight, only meaningless graphics and gibberish writing.

Still no vectors, tensors, matrices or differentials.
Not to speak of Maxwell equations.

Sinusoidal waves are difficult to mathimatical model in 3 dimensions. Im using a 5 year old samsung tablet, if it was easy to mathimatical model 3 dimensional waves it would require a supercomputer. If you cant understand that the negative value below the axis of a 2 dimensional waves is irrelevant to a wave travelling away from source in 3 dimensions then the math isnt going to help you.

Is a gravitational wave generally described or shown as a sinusoidal wave? Does gravity have a negative or opposite force or not? You cant have it both. Thats the true pseudoscience we are dealing with. Either gravity has no negative and it therefore cant be a sinusoidal wave.

Consider the central observer on the poloidal axis as that of a bridge rectifier. Its as simple as that. Do you know how a bridge rectifier works?

[bd139]

No mathematics in sight, only meaningless graphics and gibberish writing.

Still no vectors, tensors, matrices or differentials.
Not to speak of Maxwell equations.

Sinusoidal waves are difficult to mathimatical model in 3 dimensions. Im using a 5 year old samsung tablet, if it was easy to mathimatical model 3 dimensional waves it would require a supercomputer. If you cant understand that the negative value below the axis of a 2 dimensional waves is irrelevant to a wave travelling away from source in 3 dimensions then the math isnt going to help you.

Is a gravitational wave generally described or shown as a sinusoidal wave? Does gravity have a negative or opposite force or not? You cant have it both. Thats the true pseudoscience we are dealing with. Either gravity has no negative and it therefore cant be a sinusoidal wave.

Consider the central observer on the poloidal axis as that of a bridge rectifier. Its as simple as that. Do you know how a bridge rectifier works?

Show us your ideas presented mathematically or go away.

And stop denigrating our professionalism on this matter.

[Nonlinearplasma]

Does gravitational collapse create perfect spheres with a poloidal axis and magnetic field for them 2?

Does your theory explain the formation of planets that have no magnetic field? And what, perfect spheres? What perfect spheres?

Tesla was a genius. He was also well known for wasting other people's money on impractical pseudo-science projects, and in modern times would likely have extracted large amounts of money from gullible people using crowd funding sites, with predictable results.

Science works because theories can be empirically tested, which is why Einstein's theories are still accepted (they are not yet disproved), and Tesla's wireless power transmission continues to exist only in the minds of those who don't understand the maths.



You have been asked more than once to show us your mathematical workings out, but instead you prefer to show CG images of magnetic fields. Until you can provide some actual maths, no-one here will take anything you say seriously.

Yes, spherical toroids produce very weak magnetic fields. The flatter and more donut shaped toroids produce stronger magnetic fields.

Gravity is the combination of every individual plasma particle wave that is travelling around the toroid. Since every particle has an opposite to the  R1 axis (equatorial axis of toroid above) they cancel each other out just like 3 phase electrical waves do when added together. However the poloidal axis creates a z pinch where the waves meet and form an exponential wave peak. This has been modelled plenty. I will include a picture of the model below. As stated the central polodial axis is like a bridge rectifier to the sinusoidal wave of AC, this is what we call the z pinch.