Transcription
Dude, hey. And everybody keeps asking me, "What were the same shirt in every video?" At least one or two or three shirts. I actually have a lot of shirts, but these are always the ones that I grab for making videos. People, I say, "Studies have been done." So people love continuity. Yeah, they don't like anything when something is changed. That seems to be another reason. But I do, I do own more than two shirts, interestingly enough. Everybody keeps asking about that.
You know, the fascinating thing about magnetism, and I spent, uh, a significant segment of my life wanting to know what magnetism truly was because I knew none of the fools out there in academia and those with PhDs in physics had a single clue. None of them ever defined the word. "Feel?" They can't tell you what magnetism is. And yes, somebody with polarity is like, "You polarization?" It's like, "Well, you know, it's like a magnet. A magnet has two poles." It's like, "Well, you just made a description, but you didn't explain anything." That's actually a first step of wisdom. When you ask someone a direct question and they give you a description, it's like, "No, I wanted to know what it is." You know, you could say, "You know, what is the essence of a horse?" And say, "Well, a horse eats grass, got four legs." No, you described a horse, you didn't say what a horse is. It's essence. You know, what is it that which makes up that which we call a horse? Not the fact that it has four legs. Anyway, it's fascinating that something so simple is so hard to describe.
I have so many countless videos, uh, attacking the explanation thereof from so many different angles, but I like to do something a lot more, um, simple, and I think a lot clearer. And people ask about counter space. Like, "What's the opposite of counter space?" Of course, counter space is, I'd rather, I just say, "Obnoxious or obtuse word that's kind of weird sounding." I was like, "What's the opposite of spatial?" Wouldn't that be counterspatial? The emotion towards inertia, acceleration. And they still can't wrap their mind around something that by definition is inertia. That which has no Cartesian value. It's like, "What? The release of that energy is something else, right?" Like the release of the energy of water, where we dissipate out the heat from water, we end up with this hard, rock-like substance that we, that we call ice. Well, magnetism is a dielectric field. I mean, if aliens landed, they would call it, um, extrinsic dielectricity in their language, right? That which we call magnetism because magnetism is a dielectric field. But polarization is no different than saying fundamental force vector. Fundamental force vector is a three-dimensional S-curve. There are no straight lines in nature. Mother Nature has no idea what a straight line is. All natures are curve-linear because force is force of something by something, release of energy from a point. And when I say point, I don't mean literally a point, i.e., a counter-spatial point, i.e., in our shower to the ether. But it has always chained therein, kind of like a dog on a chain can only go around in a curve-linear fashion because he's chained, and the chain is staked to the ground, for example. So there's a reason why there's no straight lines in Mother Nature. Many thousands of people have said this that understand nature. There's no straight lines in nature. It's like, "Why?" "Well, I don't know, but there just aren't any." There's no straight lines in Mother Nature because all lines are force vectors. Lines of what? Lines of the release of energy. They're all staked to the ground. What is the ground? In the case of a field, they're all staked in the ground, just like a dog on a chain is staked to the ground. They must follow a path that is tied at that center. That center, in the case of magnetism, is the plane of inertia.
I can show you two little simple diagrams here and something else, a hyperboloid or an upright infinity symbol right here. Of course, we have the plane of inertia, but everything is actually tied at the center here. This is also the reason why you can't cut a North Pole from a South Pole. You have a three-dimensional force vector. The whole thing, since the magnet is qualitative in nature, not quantitative in nature, because a magnet is only a magnet when it is a point source, a field object. It's changed. Its quantitative nature is identical before and after. Only as qualitative nature has changed such that now we call it a magnet because it has a field. Add extra to the magnet itself. And then, of course, is the quora or field of influence of the ether. Magnet is not emitting anything. But polarization is no different than saying fundamental force vector. Actually, out here we'd have a point of counter space. There's not a point at all because it has no Cartesian value. Here we have a three-dimensional S-curve wherein the points have been separated out. Now the force vector leads to spatialization. Spatialization, I know it kind of sounds like a fancy word. No, I didn't invent it. Is the creation of space. The extrapolation of the three-dimensional force vector is, of course, the torus. Magnetism is the dielectric field. What is then magnetism? The release of energy. Inertia, the dielectric, which has no Cartesian value at all, no spatial vector, now has a three-dimensional force vector. And in full extrapolation, create space. But space has no properties. Nicholas Tesla said that famously and accurately. It has attributes, just like a shadow has attributes, but it has no properties. It is not a thing in and of itself. A separation out of these two dots is a release of that energy or inertia. Here we have the three-dimensional force vector of the release of that integer inertia, which of course would be right here. It has no Cartesian value. It has no footprint. It has no mass or magnitude. A true singular fundamental energy force vector. And human beings call this magnetism. This is the conjugate geometry of the entire universe. The separation of those two dots. Imagine one dot, if you will, and imagine splitting that dot into two dots, and the separation of which creates a torsion in the field. That torsion is always a three-dimensional curve-linear. No straight lines in nature. Why? Because everything is chained in counter space, just like the dog is staked to the to the middle of the ground with the chain and the stake at the middle of the ground. Growth, life, death, antinomies, the double vortex. When I see a vortex, it's just one side of a torus, i.e., the toroidal magnetic field. This conjugate geometry of the entire universe. Everything's either force in motion or inertia, acceleration, right? The release of energy or the increase of energy. And that, of course, would be capacitance. And of course, ultimate energy would be zero loss of energy, and it would always be counterspatial.
This is the same reason why a capacitor, the smaller the space, the higher the capacitance, especially in the nature of light. Higher energy light like gamma, x-ray has an infinitely smaller footprint than does radio, does red in spectrum. Life, um, just think about the two dots of the torus. Let me draw a hyperboloid out here. The center of which we have inertia. We have the two dots out here now, which are really one dot separated. And if you look at, and this is just, of course, an infinity symbol. An infinity symbol upright. The loss of integer inertia, of course, is now is two dots. And this, of course, extrapolates out the three-dimensional magnet thereof. What would happen by the loss of integer inertia that we now have polarity? What then is the definition of polarity? Polarity is no different than if a more advanced life form were to come down. It's like, "You human beings keep talking about polarity in a North Pole and a South Pole, but you don't understand polarity." Polarity is that loss of integer inertia and the curve-linear three-dimensional force vector of that loss of integer inertia, which we call magnetism. The upright infinity signal. This is just a three-dimensional force vector in completion.
The other thing, and I've never talked about this in a video, it's amazing to me once again how simple something is, so sublime as magnetism is, and yet I haven't covered this topic. People say, "Well, unlikes." If these are, of course, were magnets, uh, non-likes. It's magnetic attraction. In other words, what? North Pole and a South Pole accelerate. They're unlikes. North and South or South and North, they'll actually accelerate. This magnetic attraction, which is not magnetism at all. Likes don't actually repel. It's like, "Well, if you put a North Pole on a North Pole or a South Pole on a South Pole, they'll repel." It's not repelling. They're actually force magnifiers. You're literally talking about multiplicatives of toroidal force vectors or the creation of space. A multiplicative force vector, not inertia, acceleration, but centrifugal force in motion. Two unlikes are multiplicative magnifiers. There's not a single scientist on this Earth that has told you why. Way two like magnets, you put them together, it feels like there's something between them. You can sit there and try to put them together, push them together, and they will go. There's something going on there. They actually will tell you magnets are emitting virtual photons. It's not. That's crazy, isn't it? That's what these guys actually say. So it's not repelling. That, by the way, is true magnetism because magnetism is the force in motion. Fundamental extrapolative vector, loss of integer inertia, the dielectric, which once again is a three-dimensional curve-linear force vector. Yeah, and those are not big words. I don't know why people keep thinking I'm using big words when I'm actually saying these things. And I'm actually not, um, no different than light and illumination. Principle and attribute. Same distinction between dielectric and magnetic. Yeah, nobody ever sees light. People see illumination. "I see the light." No, you're not seeing light, you're seeing illumination because the light bulb, for example, actually creates a release of that energy, like a little, uh, tungsten coil between a DC current or AC current that's actually passed through it. You have a release of energy. You actually see illumination. This is no distinction between dielectric. Well, true dielectricity of light would be the light switch is turned off. You're not, uh, a wheel on the back of your house that calculates the kilowatt hours that you're consuming is at a dead stop. That would be the dielectric. Yeah, the magnetic would be flipping the light switch on. You're actually creating a force of motion vector. You're actually burning energy. Light and illumination, dielectric and magnetic. There's no distinction there. Light, of course, is the central rarefaction and compression. Conductor, refraction, compression. This is where they actually came up with the idea of a photon. Yes, this is where we get scalar energy. What is scalar energy, by the way? Since everybody's always asking about scalar energy. Scalar energy is no different than the central conductor of the coaxial circuit of light without the transverse component. There is those transverse component scalars. Unfortunately, they call them scalar waves because there's no wave or frequency component in scalar. It's rarefaction, compression, actually measured in volts per second, yeah, not cycles per second or frequency. It doesn't have a frequency. There is no transversal wave component. Illumination, of course, is the transverse incomplete propagating torus. All light, the transverse electrical magnetic, is a curve-linear transverse electrical magnetic with their corresponding frequency and wavelength to the rarefaction and compression of that coaxial circuit that we call light. But that's just an incomplete torus. I was actually called out incorrectly. People say, "You talked about circular frequency." In other, circular frequency. Circular frequency is no different than saying a torus. A circular frequency. It is not propagating. Yeah, now there is geomagnetic precession, which has its own cycle, but it is still a circular frequency. You want in a simple example of a circular frequency? Hydrogen. All atoms are compounds of hydrogen. But circular frequency, which is super, super high energy light, well above that of gamma. It's hydrogen. Doesn't that make Mother Nature really, really simple? People don't realize that the transverse electrical magnetic is a partial torus. It is an incomplete torus. What would be an incomplete transverse electrical magnetic? No different than the fundamental force vector that I actually drew right here for the plane of inertia. Now, I'll have to do to finish this out. I don't know if I have chalk here. Is actually repeat this. There we go. And draw the rarefaction and pulse perturbation right here. And I didn't draw much else. And now I've got a light circuit. The rarefaction and compression right here. There's the rarefaction, and there's the compression. Wherever there's a rarefaction, we have the transverse electrical and the transverse magnetic with a set frequency. And where we have compression, we have this little thing that ignorant atomus, i.e., those in quantum and relativity. There's the photon right there. We have this pulse. And light, there's a photon. This is what they call the photon. Yeah, this is the compression where there's no transverse electrical magnetic. Yeah, because it exists right there. And where there's rarefaction, we have the loss of that dielectric right here. And just, just the center part by itself without the transverse. That's what Nikola Tesla, uh, Nikola Tesla to this death ray. But it's what people today call scalar energy. Yeah.
Understanding magnetism, dielectricity, force and motion, motion, acceleration, increasing inertia, acceleration towards the dielectric of the plane of inertia, i.e., towards counter space, is really, really simple. And none of you have ever thought like that in your lives. You haven't. I mean, I don't think that's the case. I know that's the case. But if people really want to understand it, and it's like, "Why did I, you know, dedicate a certain amount of my life to understanding what really is a field? What really is magnetism?" Because the entire physical universe is due to magnetism and magnetism only. That which keeps the air of the balloon of every atom afloat. In other words, the air inside the balloon that we call a magnum, an atom, excuse me, analogously, of course, is magnetism. I.E., the volume measured in picometers of every atom on Earth, whether it be hydrogen, plutonium, uranium, gold, silver, makes no difference. In other words, mass and magnitude are due to one thing only. The loss of energy, inertia of chalk dust. Excuse me, I'll edit that out of this video. Chalk dust got in my lungs there. That's what keeps the air. That is the air, actually. And of course, it's not really air. Of course, the mass and magnitude or volume of every atom in the universe is due to magnetism. So that's the reason why I actually wanted to understand magnetism. But if people would understand the conjugate nature of the entire universe, light and illumination, dielectricity and magnetism, nourishing acceleration, force and motion. There's no such thing as magnetic attraction. That's dielectric acceleration. Yeah. These so-called repelling forces, two like poles, put them together. Every physicist on Earth, every book, you'll hear, "Yeah, that's magnetic, uh, repulsion." You know, you can't push them together. No, they're not. You've got multiplicatives of force magnifiers. Why do unlikes accelerate? North and South or South and the North? Well, that's not magnetic attraction, which does not exist at all. A complete misnomer. This existed in the minds of humans for thousands of years. Why are they attracting or why are they accelerating? Because dissipation is space. Nature abhors a vacuum. You ever heard that one before? Well, nature's vacuum is the after-effect of a divergent magnetic field, i.e., space. That vacuum is a vacuum of inertia. A vacuum of inertia. Nature is always interested in erasing this thing that you call magnetic attraction, which is not magnetism based at all. Nature abhors a vacuum. It's really that simple. You don't need a glossary to learn that one. Doesn't that make it simple? You understand with a coaxial circuit of light is. You understand that the transverse electrical magnetic is the rarefaction of that dielectric pulse perturbation. Smaller the space, the higher the capacitance, higher the frequency too. This means understanding how a magnet works is no different than understanding what light is. Is no different than understanding, you know, the so-called accelerative and repulsion factors of magnet, like polarities and unlike polarities. It also too makes understanding polarity really simple. Polarity is the extrapolation of the loss of integer inertia, which manifests as the three-dimensional force vector. That three-dimensional force vector is no different than the frequency of light. Is no different than the gyromagnetic procession that makes up in full the torus of the magnetic field around e in the atom or any magnet. Everything is unified in divine simplicity. And it does take wisdom and clarity of vision to see it. And it is quite much more difficult the thing to actually elaborate and discuss, as I've learned over the years. Unfortunately, a little bit of chalk dust there. Damn chalk dust. I remember what I hated about school. All the chalk dust in the air. Not that I'm allergic to it or anything, but it sucks. Anyway, thank you so much for watching. If you want to contact me, my email is in the description below. Any donations always warmly welcome. Email if you have any questions about anything too, by the way. I have, it is a glossary below that you could download the definitions of any words that I use. You know, I created that and posted it. It's been the past thousand videos, probably. Thanks for watching. Thank you.