## Permittivity and Permeability

Discussion of electricity, electronics, electrical components and theories of circuit operation.
bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Permittivity and Permeability

Permittivity, ε, is the resistance encountered when forming an electric field in a medium, defined by Farads per meter. A Farad in RS2 is s3/t and a meter is just 's', so the natural units for permittivity are s2/t. (Larson's RS and conventional science consider a Farad to be "s" and the value therefore has no units).

Permeability, µ, is a value indicating how supportive a medium is to the formation of a magnetic field, defined by Newtons per ampere squared (N/A2). In natural units, Newtons are a force t/s2 and an ampere is a speed, s/t, giving t3/s4.

The units for both are a bit strange, until you look at how they are related to a much more understandable value, the speed of light:

$c^2 = \frac{1}{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}$ or $1 = c^2 \epsilon_0 \mu_0$

I know how math people like to factor things out, so I got to wondering what would happen if the c2--a speed--was distributed over both permittivity and permeability, and obtained an interesting result:

$1 = c^2 \epsilon_0 \mu_0 = (c \epsilon_0) (c \mu_0)$

$(c \epsilon_0) = \frac{s}{t} \frac{s^2}{t} = \frac{s^3}{t^2}$ -- the units for electrical conductivity, G = I/V.

$(c \mu_0) = \frac{s}{t} \frac{t^3}{s^4} = \frac{t^2}{s^3}$ -- the units for electrical resistance, R = V/I.

We now have sensible, inversely-related, natural units that are commonplace in electrical engineering. The factoring out of the speed from these terms into c2 just disguised what they really are, nothing more than electrical conductivity and resistance.

This implies that electricity and magnetism are just reciprocals of each other, and not two, separate phenomenon, which explains why their behavior is linked in EM radiation.

What is interesting is that permittivity is described as resistance, yet has the units of conductivity. Permeability, which is described as a conductivity, has units of resistance. Since they are the inverse of what would be expected, that would indicate the observer is on the other side of a unit boundary (the 1 in the equation) making these behavioral observations.
Last edited by bperet on Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed UTF-8 problems with Greek letters
Every dogma has its day...

bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Atomic and Nuclear zones

What is interesting is that permittivity is described as resistance, yet has the units of conductivity. Permeability, which is described as a conductivity, has units of resistance.
It appears that both permittivity and permeability describe, as Nehru put it, the "nuclear" and "atomic" zones within the time region, respectively. This sheds some light on the situation.

Consider the nuclear region as a capacitor, which when charged, produces an electric field. Permittivity is the resistance encountered attempting to FORM an electric field in this region. One would think that the more conductive it is, the easier a field would form but it the reverse situation that is true--when a conductor "conducts," there is no need to store the energy as an electric field--it flows. Only upon resistance (the dielectric in a capacitor) does the flow get blocked and converted into the potential energy of the electric field. This is why permittivity has units of conductance--the better the conductor in the nuclear region, the higher the resistance is to forming an electric field.

The situation is the same for the permeability of the atomic zone, what Nehru describes as the 3D zone of atomic rotation within the time region. I now suspect this is a 2D zone, and it is the composite of both nuclear (1D) and atomic (2D) that form the 3D region of coordinate time.

This opens up the interesting possibility that atoms can be described as a "tuned circuit" within the time region, with the nuclear zone forming the capacitive section and the atomic zone forming the inductive section. At this atomic level, it would be a perfect tuned circuit, without the stray impedance that exists in larger versions used in electronic equipment.

The chemistry of molecules would be analogous to harmonic resonance; a combination of LC circuits that are at a specific, resonant frequency. (The similarities to John Keely's work is very noticeable with this structure.)
Every dogma has its day...

Horace
Posts: 276
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:40 pm

### LC resonance

Macro LC tank circuits can be pumped up at their resonant frequency.

So what whould happen if an external EM energy at precisely this LC resonant frequency was applied to gravitational aggregates of these atoms or their compounds?

Are we capable of calculating this LC resonance frequency for ubiquitous subtances such as water or iron?

Lou
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 5:25 pm

### EM Reciprocality

Hi Bruce.
I think of got some answers for you here, I hope.

If you would consider s/t as a proportion of phi, then, at the reflection to the so called cosmic sector s/t would not and could not become t/s, not being unity.

Consider this; space at the 'reflection' remains in the numerator and begins contraction. Time must be birotational (counter rotational ) and at reflection, time flips the rotations or changes polarity just as light would at a reflection. This is your inside-out flip you have mentioned to me before. The phi spiral is taylor made for this kind of operation. Prior to the reflection time is spiraling out. After reflection time begins an inward spiral.

Therefore, what you would refer to as a cosmic sector flip is actually space starting to contract and time counter rotating the other way and chasing space inward. Only the time component makes the flip, merely changing polarity but the whole of the time component remaining in the denominator. This thus preserves the original s/t relationship. I think this explains why your units are inverse from what you expect.

Recall that previously I disagreed with you on E = t/s. This on the grounds that this is the inverse of what you see in E= mc^2, where E is proportional to inverse time. Electricity and magnetism is the exact same relationship as Time's birotational spirals and should not be broken up into 2d rotational and 1d translational components. In fact, the more I think about it the more Time seems to be the same as the photon and EM!? For your consideration.

Regards, Louis

bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Heat - hot stuff

So what would happen if an external EM energy at precisely this LC resonant frequency was applied to gravitational aggregates of these atoms or their compounds?
In an aggregate, the motion that has the largest effect on the system is thermal motion--heat--because it is a spatial displacement. Applying EM energy at the appropriate frequency would probably just increase the magnitude of the thermal motion and heat up the aggregate like a microwave oven.
Are we capable of calculating this LC resonance frequency for ubiquitous subtances such as water or iron?
It would be relatively simple to calculate the frequencies in perfect conditions--no thermal motion, no electric or magnetic ionization, nor isotopic mass. As of yet, I do not know how these factors would influence the system, but if they can be determined by rules, a computer program should be able to figure it out precisely, given the environmental conditions.

That was the area Keely had problems with. His systems were mechanical, tuned to a specific, environmental condition. Move the machine, change the weather, the Earth's position relative to the moon and sun, and the frequencies would shift, causing failure. That is why his motor never took off--it would work fine in the garage, but as soon as you started down the street, the frequencies would shift and would fail, needing to be re-tuned. However, with today's computers and sensory equipment that could be easily overcome (no more difficult than an automatic fine-tuning circuit in a television). Just adjust as you go.

I was looking at Keely's stuff again, at least the bits that survived. He wrote thousands of pages on his work, which all disappeared after his death, as what usually happens. I noticed something about his atomic structure and chords that I have not previously recognized--if you treat them as resonant circuits, the chords he lists for the atoms are NOT the frequencies of the atoms--they are a RATIO of frequencies between his atomole levels--they are not randomly positioned on his diagrams.

The frequencies are going to be very high, in the order of 6.6 Phz for the electron alone. BUT, the ratio between frequencies will be very small, and I'd bet well within the range of mechanical vibration. Mechanical vibration is a pressure wave. Increase the magnitude of those ratios, without altering the ratio, itself, and it will literally push molecules apart, or the atoms of a molecule apart--disintegration. Throw it out of phase and decrease the magnitude, and you have the equivalent of cold fusion (welding without heat). I'm going to see if I can work out an electrical analogy.
Every dogma has its day...

bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Phi

If you would consider s/t as a proportion of phi, then, at the reflection to the so called cosmic sector s/t would not and could not become t/s, not being unity.
I've looked at the Golden Ratio with respect to the RS before. Examine how the ratio is determined--it is a recursion, a geometric infinite series. That means it is appilcable only under certain circumstances, those where one of the aspects of space or time are fixed at unity so you have a zero/infinity to recurse to--It is not generally applicable.

With what I've just learned, and using the concepts behind Mathis' calculus, I can determine phi from the speed of the electron or positron:

The electron is a single unit displacement in space, the positron is a single unit displacement in time. In other words they have speeds of 2/1 or 1/2, respectively. In RS2, I use complex quantities to represent motion, so we're looking at a capacitor (2/1) or inductor (1/2), with one leg (resistance or reactance) at unit speed, and the other at 2. Plot this on the complex plane, and you get a triangle with the dimensions of 1 x 2 or 2 x 1, with a hypoteneuse of sqrt(5). The hypoteneus is the extra speed added to unit electric displacement. The net speed would be the average of unit speed 1/1 + electron speed, sqrt(5)/1, resulting in a speed of (1+sqrt(5))/2 = phi. In electronic terms, phi is the impedance of the electron and positron.

Phi occurs in nature because it is a single-unit displacement from the natural datum of unity, one of the most common displacements around. That single-unit displacement is easily reflected, as demonstrated by the relations between phi and unity. And reflection is a good description, because in the space or time region, you are literally in a "hall of mirrors."
Electricity and magnetism is the exact same relationship as Time's birotational spirals and should not be broken up into 2d rotational and 1d translational components
In the material sector, time is rotational, which is why I use imaginary operators to represent it (imaginary = rotational operator). I believe I already posted on LC circuits being a birotation elsewhere on this forum, as both inductance and capacitance are force fields--temporal. However, I believe the dimensional difference should be understood, not ignored. I have some thoughts on that I will post later.
Every dogma has its day...