A NEW PARADIGM, Part II of II. Now, what does Fleming's Rule state? Fleming's Rule states: "If the fingers of the right hand are placed around a current-carrying wire so that the thumb points in the direction of the conventional current, the fingers will point in the direction of the magnetic field." Great. This is a convenient "rule." It is a corroborable-by-observation "rule." Great. Electrical engineers are aware (presumably) of this Rule. But accepting the limited paradigm of the Rule does not answer the more fundamental question: What *MECHANICALLY* causes the Rule to be true? This is the more fundamental question that occupied Joseph Newman's mind during the 1960s. He sought an honest answer to this more fundamental question as to what is the *MECHANICAL* cause of Fleming's Rule. He could not find an answer to this question in any of the books that he read on electromagnetics and electrical engineering. Yet he believed it was absolutely essential to answer this question, if he was to progress in a deeper understanding of the fundamental *MECHANICAL* nature of (electro)magnetic fields [per Faraday's and Maxwell's statements above]. It was about this time in his studies that he began studying the GYROSCOPE. He had heard that the "gyroscope" was a stabilizer, but did not know much more about its nature. As a hobby, he began mechanically working with gyroscopes and children's bicycles (he converted the bicycle of a neighbor's son to a clutch system to better enable it to perform "wheelies") --- so he began to acquire a first-hand understanding of the behavior of GYROSCOPES. At one point in this process, he _instantly_ had an answer to the question that had "boggled his mind" for so long: he _instantly_ knew that those "somethings" in that magnetic field surrounding Faraday's Generator individually behaved as miniature "GYROSCOPES." Many related concepts then began to "click" in him mind. It was then that his real insights into the _mechanical_ nature of (electro)magnetic fields began to generate a new paradigm concerning such fields. As he explains in detail in Chapter Two of his book: [Note: I will endeavor to describe only in words what is graphically and with words depicted step-by-step in the book.] 1-A) If one has North and South ends of magnets facing one another with a gap between them (as in Faraday's Generator), if one moves a conductor DOWN at a right angle to the magnetic field, the CURRENT FLOW MOVES LEFT. (Figure 11-A) 1-B) If one applies a downward force to the axis of a spinning gyroscope, it will pivot at a right angle to the force (in this case of Figure 11-A1) it will PIVOT LEFT. Now imagine that this gyroscope has a forward motion at the speed of light as well as spins at the speed of light. 2-A) If one has North and South ends of magnets facing one another with a gap between them (as in Faraday's Generator), if one moves a conductor UP at a right angle to the magnetic field, the CURRENT FLOW MOVES RIGHT. (Figure 11-B) 2-B) If one applies a upward force to the axis of a spinning gyroscope, it will pivot at a right angle to the force (in this case of Figure 11-B1) it will PIVOT RIGHT and opposite to the case of 1-B above. Now imagine that this gyroscope has a forward motion at the speed of light as well as spins at the speed of light. 3-A) Now flip the above-described magnets over 180 degrees: If one has a South and North magnet facing one another with a gap between them (as in Faraday's Generator), if one moves a conductor DOWN at a right angle to the magnetic field, the CURRENT FLOW MOVES RIGHT and opposite to that of case 1-A even though the force direction is the same. (Figure 11-C) 3-B) Now flip the above-described gyroscope over 180 degrees: If one applies a downward force to the axis of a spinning gyroscope, it will pivot at a right angle to the force (in this case of Figure 11-C1) it will PIVOT RIGHT and opposite to the case of 1-B above even though the force direction is the same. Now imagine that this gyroscope has a forward motion at the speed of light as well as spins at the speed of light. 4-A) With the magnets in the same position as 3-A, If one has a South and North magnet facing one another with a gap between them (as in Faraday's Generator), if one moves a conductor UP at a right angle to the magnetic field, the CURRENT FLOW MOVES LEFT and opposite to that of case 2-A even though the force directon is the same. (Figure 11-D) 4-B) With the gyroscope in the same position as 3-B, If one applies a upward force to the axis of a spinning gyroscope, it will pivot at a right angle to the force (in this case of Figure 11-D1) it will PIVOT LEFT and opposite to the case of 2-B above even though the force direction is the same. Now imagine that this gyroscope has a forward motion at the speed of light as well as spins at the speed of light. 5-A) With the magnets in the same position as 3-A, Move the conductor vigorously "up" and "down" through the magnetic field, MAINTAINING THE CONDUCTOR FORCE PARALLEL TO THE MAGNETIC LINES OF FORCE AND *NO* CURRENT FLOW IN THE CONDUCTOR WILL RESULT. 5-B) Apply a vigorous "up" and "down" force parallel to the axis of the spinning gyroscope. Regardless of how energetically the force is applied, as long as the force remains parallel, the gyroscope will not pivot even though it has a forward motion at the speed of light. THE ANALOGY OF THE ABOVE TWO EXAMPLES IS SCIENTIFICALLY EXACT! Once Joseph Newman began to understand that the "mechanically moving somethings" in a magnetic field each possessed a GYROSCOPIC SPIN, then many other insights began to fall into place. It was at this time that Joseph Newman also began to understand and mechanically explain: 1) Why, in a mechanical sense, does a magnet attract and repel other magnets? 2) Why, in a mechanical sense, do electric charges attract and repel? 3) What is the energy in a magnetic field and what is its source? 4) Did the energy used in creating a permanent magnet have any bearing upon the strength or energy contained within a magnetic field emitted from the permanent magnet once it was made? As Joseph Newman writes in Chapter Two of his book, "In the early part of 1965, I eagerly researched the known facts concerning the creation of a permanent magnet. Because I instinctively knew that if the strength of a magnetic field was solely relative to the energy input, then I would know I was incorrect. But if the strength of the magnetic field was INDEPENDENT of the energy input, then I would be even more assured that I was correct. "Upon examining the known facts concerning permanent magnets, I again knew that I WAS correct." It took Joseph Newman over 15 years to develop and refine his Theory and Technical Process. It was not until these many years passed did he even construct his first crude, hand-built prototype to demonstrate the operability of his Technical Process. Ironically, Joseph Newman _knew_ that his invention would work and demonstrate the nature of his Technical Process. The prototype(s) were needed to convince the rest of the world. I should add, that Joseph Newman considers his Theory to be far more important than the application. This attitude on his part is a bit analogous to Einstein and his Theory of Relativity. For a number of years earlier in this century there was no "proof" of Einstein's Theory -- it was just a challenging (and sometimes upsetting to others) idea in Einstein's head. It was not until the Ecliptic Expedition of 1919 (Chaired by Arthur Eddington) that Einstein's Theory was corroborated. During 1919, a journalist on hand who was following the Expedition cornered Einstein and asked him, "Dr. Einstein, your entire Theory hangs on the balance of this Expedition. Arn't you a bit concerned as to its outcome?" Characteristically, Einstein replied, "Oh no. I'm not worried. I _know_ my Theory is correct. The Expedition is only needed to convince the rest of the world." My introduction to Joseph Newman's work nearly 14 years ago was through an understanding of his revolutionary explanation for Magnetic Attraction and Repulsion. It was at that point that I became convinced of the validity of his Theory. In essence, a MAGNETIC FIELD mechanically consists of "negative" and "positive" gyroscopic particles having opposite spins and simultaneously traveling in OPPOSITE directions, e.g., the concentric "shells of force" surrounding a bar magnet. An ELECTRIC CURRENT mechanically consists of "negative" and "positive" gyroscopic particles having opposite spins and traveling in the SAME direction down a conductor wire --- as does light traveling in space through a medium. Should anyone wish, I thought I would mention that I would also be happy to forward the gif graphics which depict the interaction of bar magnets in magnetic Attraction/Repulsion as well as Magnetic Fields/Electric Current Interaction in considerable detail, plus Oscilloscope Photos, and the Interaction of Coil & Magnet Systems. These consist of: 6 gif files (66-99K each) and specifically depict: 1) Magnets in Attraction (top view) [83K] 2) Magnets in Attraction (lower view) [99K] 3) Magnets in Attraction (close-up view) [66K] 4) Magnets in Repulsion (top view) [83K] 5) Magnets in Repulsion (lower view) [99K] 6) Magnets in Repulsion (close-up view) [66K] The 7th gif depicts: 7) Magnetic Field/Electric Current Interaction [33K] (from an original sketch by physicist Robert J. Matherne) The 8th - 14th gifs depict: 8) Oscilloscope Photo 1 [33K] 9) Oscilloscope Photo 2 [33K] 10) Oscilloscope Photo 3 [33K] 11) Oscilloscope Photo 4 [33K] 12) Oscilloscope Photo 5 [33K] 13) Oscilloscope Photo 6 [33K] 14) Oscilloscope Photo 7 [33K] The 15th - 20th gifs depict: 15) Interaction of Coil & Magnet System - 1 [33K] 16) Interaction of Coil & Magnet System - 2 [17K] 17) Interaction of Coil & Magnet System - 3 [17K] 18) Interaction of Coil & Magnet System - 4 [17K] 19) Interaction of Coil & Magnet System - 5 [17K] 20) Interaction of Coil & Magnet System - Full View [33K] Gifs (1) - (7) and (15) - (20) are depicted in Joe's book. Gifs (8) - (14) are not. Gyroscopically yours, THE ENERGY MACHINE OF JOSEPH NEWMAN 11445 East Via Linda, No. 416 Scottsdale, Arizona 85259 (480) 657-3722 www.josephnewman.com "In speaking of the Energy of the field, however, I wish to be understood literally. All energy is the same as mechanical energy, whether it exists in the form of motion or in that of elasticity, or in any other form. The energy in electromagnetic phenomena is _mechanical_ energy." --- JAMES CLERK MAXWELL End of Post.
