## Dielectric Fields

Discussion of electricity, electronics, electrical components and theories of circuit operation.
bperet
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Dielectric Fields

The dielectric field, ψ, is a concept popularized by Eric Dollard from his Borderland Sciences lectures back in the 1980s. It is the electric analog to a magnetic field that has no magnetic component. This differs from the conventional EM field, which has both components.

The dielectric field is considered a linear, radial field that is emitted by a charge as a "line of force." In a wire, this field is accompanied by a circumferential magnetic field:
Dielectric and Magnetic flux
Dielectric-and-Magnetic-Flux-Lines.png (20.88 KiB) Viewed 1636 times
The dielectric field, like the electron, has units of space, s. The magnetic field, ϕ, has units of t2/s2. The intersection of these lines of force produces a motion with the units of t2/s, or action, which are the units of Planck's constant. This "Planck line of force" is the electromagnetic line, φ, that runs orthogonal to both the dielectric and magnetic lines, parallel to the flow of current in the wire.

A few days ago, I acquired a professional Van de Graaff generator that is capable of producing a 450,000 volt charge and have been running some experiments. The results were interesting, as they were backwards from what I was expecting. It has made me question the "line of force" concept that was developed by Maxwell and Faraday.

When the sphere is charged up, the dielectric field tend to pull things towards it. This is normally explained by the negative charge inducing a positive charge on the remote object, and opposites attract. But it could also be explained in RS terms as just a net, inward motion.

The interesting thing is that when field is discharged into a spark, the spark his highly repulsive, kicking the remote object with considerable force--the inward motion is converted to outward motion, which indicates the field cross a unit boundary and inverted when it collapsed. The discharge looks similar to lightning, so it may be an effect generated by the atmosphere. Right now, considering the possibility that the dielectric field is actually an angular field (not radial), so when the field "wave" collapsed into a particle, you get a linear discharge in the inverse "unit of motion."

Running more experiments now. But I suspect that the whole "line of force" concept only works with specific conditions of electromagnetism, the ones most commonly observed, and falls apart with things like transients (as Steinmetz described). A proper theoretical model should account for all these properties.
Every dogma has its day...

bperet
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Re: Dielectric Fields

Been running more dielectric field experiments... giving me some unusual and unexpected results.

I was using Geiger counter alignment disks (thorium 232) that each produce about 60 CPM (1 per second), so the meter was clicking irregularly, varying from about 110-125 CPM, but steady. Fluxuations occur from added background radiation. I put it in the dielectric field, to see what happens. From things I had heard from Dave Faust (deceased), the dielectric field tends to neutralize radiation. I've also seen this with nearby ground strikes from lightning in the past. But... nope, not much happened.

I left it running and was running an experiment on attraction and repulsion of a small metal sphere. That is also interesting, because when put in the field, it is pulled towards the center, then a spark arks across, kicking it outward with significant force. The inward pull of the field flips to outward push when it arcs.

I was moving the ball around the charged sphere, looking to see where the strong/weak points were, and the Geiger counter started clicking very fast. I looked at the meter and it was 180+ and climbing... 230, 250, 300, 340... I have NEVER seen it go that high before, and I've run background readings (hooked to my computer) for days on end. Shut off the Van de Graaff generator and the count immediately dropped back to the ~120 range.

OK, that is exactly the opposite of what I thought it would do... so tried to repeat it. Switched back on and it did it again... when it hit 250, I grabbed a small block of wood and put it between the thorium disks and the detector. Count dropped to less than 100. That means the thorium was the source of emission and it was most likely low-energy beta radiation (electrons). To verify, I removed the block of wood and set the detector back on the disks, and in a couple of minutes, CPM started climbing again. However, I have not been able to duplicate it since that night, so there may have been some environmental condition (or, THIS was that "accident" that caused that magnetic explosion that knocked out my electronics a while back).

I am puzzled by this behavior; it is opposite to what theory predicts--but, I based the theory on the premise that dielectricity was basically the 1D projection of cosmic magnetism. Looks like I was wrong there. Using observational data, I started to rethink the equations and it appears that the dielectric and magnetic "forces" are reciprocals of each other, not conjugates. That indicates they are BOTH material effects, one inside the time region and one outside. That being the case, permittivity and permeability of free space and the materials need to be considered. Found some interesting relations:

I (current) = s/t
V (voltage) = t/s2
Q (charge) = t/s

R (resistance) = t2/s3
L (inductance) = t3/s3
C (capacitance) = s3/t

μ (permeability) = t3/s4
ε (permittivity) = s2/t

ϕ (magnetic field) = t2/s2
ψ (dielectric field) = s
φ (Planck field) = t2/s

One of the first things you notice is that these components split into speed relations, and energy relations:

speed: current, capacitance, permittivity, dielectric field
energy: voltage, inductance, permeability, magnetic field
ratio: resistance, Planck field

Using natural units, we can find equivalent relations, which follow the same pattern for both aspects:

L = Rt, inductance is resistance for a period of time
C = Gt, capacitance is conductance for a period of time (G = 1/R)

R = μI, resistance is permeability of current
G = εI, conductance is permittivity of current

L = μψ, permeability in a dielectric field produces inductance
C = εψ, permittivity in a dielectric field produces capacitance

φ = ψϕ, the Planck field (EM) is the cross-product of the dielectric and magnetic fields (psi-phi).
ϕ = με, the magnetic field is the cross-product of permeability and permittivity.

If you notice, there is an internal consistency in these relations as reciprocals, not conjugates--but something is still off, conceptually. And since these were all developed on linear/yang thinking... here is my "spin" on it:

We consider "time" to be linear, as "the arrow of time." What if "time", as in the Rt and Gt equations above, was an angular velocity? That would mean it would be analogous to frequency, specifically the inverse of frequency, "seconds per cycle."

Look at the electronic concept of resonant frequency:

$f = \frac{1}{ \sqrt{LC} }$ or $t = \sqrt{LC}$

Which means that LC resonance is nothing more than a birotation, where inductance and capacitance are the "resistance" (reactance) that is changing the angular speed, much like a drag coefficient or "brake shoe."

Considering this, such that you have ⇀t (linear clock time, magnitude of change) and ∠t (angular clock time, frequency of change), things start to make more sense... and may point out a misconception that was introduced by Maxwell, long ago... it may be that ϕ, the "magnetic field," is actually the electromagnetic field and φ, the "Planck field" is actually a "dimagnetic field" -- a static magnetic field from scalar rotation, that parallels the dielectric field.

Now this does not change the math at all, just the conceptual interpretation of the math... so we need to rewrite equations in a more proper form, such as:

V = IR ⇒ V/I = R
φ = ψϕ ⇒ φ/ψ = ϕ

Now, field concepts match current concepts; voltage (t/s2) parallels Planck field (t2/s), current (s/t) parallels the dielectric (s) and their ratio has resistance (t3/s3) paralleling the EM field (t2/s2). The difference is ∢t, as the former is direct current, and the latter is alternating current.

Still working on the concept, but things seem to be making more sense. The "B field" of magnetism seems to be a reactance field, the angular form of resistance, so we never really take a look at the actual magnetic field, itself, hidden under Dollard's concept of the "Planck field."

This would also indicate my list above is incorrect, and should be:

speed: current, capacitance, permittivity, dielectric field
energy: voltage, inductance, permeability, dimagnetic/Planck field
ratio: resistance, electromagnetic field
Every dogma has its day...

SoverT
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:27 pm

### Re: Dielectric Fields

bperet wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:59 am
From things I had heard from Dave Faust (deceased), the dielectric field tends to neutralize radiation. I've also seen this with nearby ground strikes from lightning in the past. But... nope, not much happened.

I left it running and was running an experiment on attraction and repulsion of a small metal sphere. That is also interesting, because when put in the field, it is pulled towards the center, then a spark arks across, kicking it outward with significant force. The inward pull of the field flips to outward push when it arcs.

I was moving the ball around the charged sphere, looking to see where the strong/weak points were, and the Geiger counter started clicking very fast. I looked at the meter and it was 180+ and climbing... 230, 250, 300, 340... I have NEVER seen it go that high before, and I've run background readings (hooked to my computer) for days on end. Shut off the Van de Graaff generator and the count immediately dropped back to the ~120 range.

OK, that is exactly the opposite of what I thought it would do... so tried to repeat it. Switched back on and it did it again... when it hit 250, I grabbed a small block of wood and put it between the thorium disks and the detector. Count dropped to less than 100. That means the thorium was the source of emission and it was most likely low-energy beta radiation (electrons). To verify, I removed the block of wood and set the detector back on the disks, and in a couple of minutes, CPM started climbing again. However, I have not been able to duplicate it since that night, so there may have been some environmental condition (or, THIS was that "accident" that caused that magnetic explosion that knocked out my electronics a while back).
I'm curious if the duration of time where you observed CPM spikes was the same length as the magnetic fallout duration disabling your electronics. I expect you didn't sit there 12 hours in a row testing to see if it was still reproducible though!

Also interesting that you seem to have observed the same non-neutralization of radiation that I recorded. I hadn't gotten back around to excluding possible confounding environmental factors in a rerun

bperet
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Re: Dielectric Fields

SoverT wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 11:39 am
I'm curious if the duration of time where you observed CPM spikes was the same length as the magnetic fallout duration disabling your electronics. I expect you didn't sit there 12 hours in a row testing to see if it was still reproducible though!
It caught me by surprise and the spikes were only a couple of minutes, max, before I got nervous about the rising values and shut things down.

It did it again, today. Thought it might be an anomaly with my thorium disks, so I streamed the CPM counts of the disk to my computer for the last hour. Results: min:122, max:184, average:149. The 184 count only lasted for a few seconds, so probably a cosmic ray. But NOTHING CLOSE to the 300+ CPM I was getting...
303 CPM and rising...
cpm-303.jpg (58.02 KiB) Viewed 1599 times
.
I still do not know what triggers it off. But when it starts, it is just like an avalanche.
SoverT wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 11:39 am
Also interesting that you seem to have observed the same non-neutralization of radiation that I recorded. I hadn't gotten back around to excluding possible confounding environmental factors in a rerun
I noticed the drop during some severe thunderstorms we had, back in 2013. We don't seem to get those anymore, at least not in the last few years. But I have come to learn that lightning has different forms. No way to tell the polarity of the bolts hitting, other than they were sky-to-ground and very intense flashes.

From my dielectric experiments here using negative charges, they may have been positive lightning (ground, up, rather than sky, down). That may explain the backwards behavior.

I keep going back to Gustave LeBon's book, The Evolution of Matter, where he discovered a way to change radioactive decay rates but never really described the process in detail. Given it was published in 1907, it must be a relatively simple process. The answer is probably in there, but I just missed it.
Every dogma has its day...

bperet
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Electrostatic field???

If an electrostatic charge is flowing across the surface of insulators, like "air" and glass, then WHY is the neon INSIDE this vacuum-sealed, glass tube lighting up? The end of the tube is about a foot from the sphere. (The plastic tube that holds the globe is lit from below; just the way they make it).
Holding neon tube near Van de Graaff generator
neon-tube.jpg (43.49 KiB) Viewed 1598 times
.
I've also used a glass rod, but my camera is not sensitive enough to pick up the "brush" discharge from it--NOT a spark, but similar to what Tesla describes in his experiments. When you hold the rod near the charged sphere (hemispherical ends), a blue, electrical discharge can be seen that looks like something coming out of a can of spray paint that is wider than the rod (rod diameter is about 1/2", spray is at least double that). It disappears after a short distance, then a broad, cylindrical blue beam is seen hitting the side of the sphere.

I looked online to see if there were any photos of this, but did not find anything. The closest I could find was the Markalite ray used against the Mysterians (in the 1957 film, The Mysterians):
Markalite ray
Markalite Attacks.png (296.75 KiB) Viewed 1598 times
.
Also interesting to note that if you put a conductor near the sphere and it sparks, you get one heck of a wallop through your arm--enough to fire your muscles. BUT, when you hold an insulator (glass rod), it does not do that... there is no discharge, just the spray. It even jumped over to my fingers a couple of times, and did not feel anything except the hair on my hands and arms standing up. Also, the location where your hand holds the glass rod lights up blue.

There are two different forms of electricity here. The dielectric field, which is "inward" (pulls) and the discharge, which is outward (kicks). And that spark kicks with significant force. I also noticed that when the field collapses to form the spark, the hairs on my arm--which were being pulled towards the sphere, get suddenly pushed away (not just the "pressure" released--they get pushed to my skin--I watch it happen). The entire field seems to reverse when it arcs... just concentrated at the arc.

I suspect that the linear "space" of the dielectric field, ψ, upon discharge, crosses the unit boundary and takes its dual form, angular space--a "rotating unit of space," the electron, which forms the conduction across the air molecules to make the "electric current" spark.
Every dogma has its day...

bperet
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Magnetism in Dielectric field

More experimental weirdness! My setup is a 450kv electrostatic generator that has a ground wire attached to a smaller, metal sphere on an insulated handle (so you don't get shocked). Under normal conditions, it will throw a bright spark 3-4 inches.

Experiment #1: thorium 232 calibration disk

I used a Geiger counter thorium-232 alignment disk, which has a CPM of about 120, and placed it on the handheld sphere (balanced on top). As I moved it towards the charged sphere, it started throwing a light blue arc at more than twice the distance it would normally spark, some 8-9 inches. This does not make much sense. The Th-232 is just emitting low energy β- particles at 1-2 a second. First, the emission is 720°, so it would have to emit in the direction towards the sphere. Second, the sphere is negatively charged, as is the β- electron, so they should REPEL each other, not connect as a spark! It is acting more like a nonlocal field effect than particle emission.

These experimental observations do not agree with what I had been taught. Good thing everything is done with simulations in a virtual environment now, because when you go to "real life" -- none of it adds up!

Experiment #2: magnet on wand

I placed a cubical 500 milliTesla magnet on the top of the handheld sphere/wand, and placed in near the charged sphere. It sparked--but from the FAR CORNER of the magnet, the one furthest from the sphere. (The magnetic is your regular, chrome-plated rare-earth type.) BUT, it was not the sharp, blue lightning-like spark--it was the darker blue, lower energy spark--AND, it had to be put within 1/2" of the sphere to do it. This sphere arcs to metal 3+ inches away--but the presence of the magnet seemed to inhibit the effect.

So I got curious and rotated the magnet to move the corner closer. Sure enough, sparked to the same corner. Now I started wondering... tried different orientations of the magnet to see if it would act differently. Did I get a surprise...

This is a metal magnet stuck to the top of a metal sphere. It WILL NOT cause that sharp, electric discharge that you get when the magnet isn't present--it goes back to an effect similar to holding the glass rod--that "Markalite ray" discharge that fans out from the magnet like a spray. In essence, placing the magnet on the sphere turned the metal conductor into a dielectric.

Then I noticed it behaves DIFFERENTLY in different orientations. When I had the N pole up, I ran tests rotating the faces at 90° intervals. There is only ONE face that completely blocks the spark effect--you can put it within 1/8" of the sphere and NOTHING--the thing is 450,000 volts and no spark at an eighth of an inch?? Rotate it--north still up--and the spark spray starts again. I've never heard or seen of this behavior before. I was taught that the "magnetic lines of force" were uniformly distributed in a cylindrical pattern from N to S... the way it is twisted should not matter.

Further experiments seem to indicate that when I had the N pole of the magnet facing near geographic N, it would block the dielectric field, so there may be an external, environmental influence.

I want to run more detailed tests, but the electrical spray is so dim you can only run the test at night in a dark room to see it, so it is hard to see/record what is actually going on. My camera does not pick up anything.
Every dogma has its day...

SoverT
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:27 pm

### Re: Magnetism in Dielectric field

bperet wrote:
Mon Jul 30, 2018 6:10 pm
Experiment #2: magnet on wand

I placed a cubical 500 milliTesla magnet on the top of the handheld sphere/wand, and placed in near the charged sphere. It sparked--but from the FAR CORNER of the magnet, the one furthest from the sphere. (The magnetic is your regular, chrome-plated rare-earth type.)
Can you test with non chrome coated magnets? If I recall, awhile back you suggested that chrome was involved in making ball lightning. I'm wondering if thats giving different results from an uncoated magnet

bperet
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Re: Magnetism in Dielectric field

SoverT wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 10:59 am
Can you test with non chrome coated magnets? If I recall, awhile back you suggested that chrome was involved in making ball lightning. I'm wondering if thats giving different results from an uncoated magnet
I used uncoated, cylindrical magnets and ran some tests. (Not as strong.)

The magnet, taped to a glass rod and moved next to the charged sphere, sprays like the dielectric did but will also throw sparks--not intense ones, just arcs.

Placing the magnet on the grounded small, metal sphere does something interesting... I am a hairy person, so when the field is on, the hair on my arms stands up. When it arcs to ground, my arm hair is pushed into my skin--not just released--so it feels like you got hit by the arc, even though you didn't.

I had the magnet on the grounded, metal sphere. As I brought the magnet closer to the charged sphere, no spark or electrical activity at all--BUT--I noticed the hair on my arm started to fall back to my skin. NOT pushed back like the spark, just "released" -- the magnet seem to be "sucking in" the entire, dielectric field (which is probably why it does not spark). And it is the entire field--even from the far side of the sphere.

This is interesting because the dielectric lines of force, ψ, are going into the magnet then to through the conductor to ground--without discharge. Removing the magnet causes the spark-type discharge.

I checked for radioactive response from the magnets--nothing; remained at background levels.
Every dogma has its day...

SoverT
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:27 pm

### Re: Magnetism in Dielectric field

bperet wrote:
This is interesting because the dielectric lines of force, ψ, are going into the magnet then to through the conductor to ground--without discharge. Removing the magnet causes the spark-type discharge.
Did you notice if there was a conduction distance between magnet and the ground sphere? In other words, if you slowly remove the magnet, was there a range of space before triggering reversion to sparking? Along the same lines, does orientation of the magnet to the ground sphere make a difference?

I'm trying to imagine what the reciprocal side of a magnet funnel would look like. Kinda hard when we're stuck on a side where structure is projected as a randomized sphere.

If we knew how to entangle two magnets, I bet you could have a nonlocal conduction with one magnet sucking in the field, and the entangled one any distance away grounding it

SoverT
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:27 pm

### Re: Dielectric Fields

bperet wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:12 pm

It did it again, today. Thought it might be an anomaly with my thorium disks, so I streamed the CPM counts of the disk to my computer for the last hour. Results: min:122, max:184, average:149. The 184 count only lasted for a few seconds, so probably a cosmic ray. But NOTHING CLOSE to the 300+ CPM I was getting...
cpm-303.jpg
.
I still do not know what triggers it off. But when it starts, it is just like an avalanche.
I just had a thought, and figured I'd throw it out here.

All motion at the core is pressure. In order for a motion to divest some of it's pressure, the immediate environment needs to be at a lower pressure, otherwise it would have nowhere to impart to.

So what if radiation neutralization is actually suppression? Increase whatever pressure it is that would prevent radiation from being emitted in the first place, and you would measure lower levels, but misinterpret the reason.

Inversely, if you suddenly dramatically lowered the surrounding pressure, you would get a radiation spike.

Regarding your earlier electronic-disabling spike, maybe conditions created a negative pressure that attracted a nearby outflow of appropriate energy.