A new explanation of the electric current!

Electric current is an immaterial swirling wind through the electrical conductor. The immaterial magnetic wind through it is also helical-shaped (i.e., it is not perpendicular to the conductor as the contemporary physics asserts). During the flow of direct current, both winds blow from the plus- to the minus-pole of the battery, the electric wind in counter-clockwise direction, whereas the magnetic wind in clockwise direction. These two fluxes are at angle of 90 degrees.

I will introduce a new explanation of the electric current which I call “dynamic” because it speaks of forces (δύναμις = force), in contrast to the contemporary explanation which is materialistic, because it speaks of material particles, called electrons, supposedly moving through the metal wires. I call the new explanation “dynamic” because in its basis lies vibration of electromagnetic forces (EM-forces). These forces are not material. What was just said is well documented when we recall that the magnetic and the electric forces cannot be blocked by material bodies that are placed between the source of the force and the bodies they act on. For example, if we put a piece of iron near a magnet, the magnet will attract it even if we place a plastic, wooden or metal board between them. Likewise, radio waves penetrate walls without perforating them. This can be done only by something that is not of material nature. But even though they are immaterial, a material body is needed as their source. And in order to manifest themselves, they also need a suitable object to act upon; otherwise we would not be aware of their existence.

Other terms necessary to understand the new explanation are “order” and “orientation”. We can get a notion of these terms from several things: from magnetism, thread, wood, etc. When a magnet is brought in the vicinity of iron powder, the particles of the powder will adhere to the magnet with strictly oriented order. If we think of such a particle as a very small line segment, then it aligns itself not only in the same direction with the other particles, but also has a strict orientation of its plus and minus poles. We can imagine the particle as the smallest possible line segment and yet its properties will remain as described. In the thread we also have an ordered multiplicity of tiny little plant or animal fibers in the same spiral direction, except that there is no orientation here, that is, the fibers have no poles.

Now I will introduce the electromagnetic force element, which is the basis of the explanation. It has the following form:
image
The EM-force element has three segments. In the middle is the magnetic segment with its two poles, M(+) and M(–), and at its ends are the electrical plus (E+) and minus (E−) segments, arranged at an angle of 90° to the magnetic segment. We have to imagine this element in a huge multiplicity, evoked by the power source.
image
[ In relation to this new explanation, we could also visualize a new notion of the matter: if we, so to say, descend ever deeper and deeper in the matter, at the end we come to nothing. But this “nothing” is actually not nothing. It is invisible, intangible, immaterial forces: electromagnetic forces, light forces etc. The matter at the end, so to say, “dissolves” in immaterial forces.
So, we could say that the matter is a kind of condensation of immaterial forces. ]

Let’s say the power source is an electrochemical cell, i.e., a battery. What is a battery? If two plates of two different metals (say copper and zinc) are partly immersed in a dissolved agent (acid, base, salt), then the part of the copper plate outside the liquid is polarized in one sense (plus), the immersed part in the opposite sense (minus). For the zinc plate applies the opposite. Plus means blowing, minus means suctioning (please see Is positive and negative electricity nomenclature arbitrary?). The two metal plates of the battery can be imagined as two fans. The one that blows outside the liquid (positive electrode = copper), that suctions inside the liquid; the one that suctions outside the liquid (negative electrode = zinc), that blows inside it. When the electrodes are connected with a metal wire, a closed flux is created. The plus is the strongest near the positive pole and, as we move away from it through the wire, its strength continuously decreases. The same applies to the minus, but starting from the other pole. Figuratively, we can represent it this way:
image
So, the current that emanates from the copper plate is a plus current, because we usually speak of the current through the connecting wire. The current from the zinc plate is a minus current.

Just as the air wind from a fan is a swirling motion, so it is the electric wind through the conducting path. And just as the air swirl is more extended when the air current is stronger, so it is the electricity’s swirl when the electric current is stronger.
image
But as the electricity’s swirl is becoming more extended with increased electric current, so the magnetic swirl, or rather, the magnetic helix is becoming more compact (i.e. less extended). When the current is stronger, then the magnetic helix is so tight, that it is practically at an angle of 90° with respect to the conductor’s line; but, of course, never ideally. At the same time the electricity’s swirl is practically at an angle of 0° with respect to the conductor’s line.

Here we have something very similar to the water swirl and its cavitation. When a propeller is turning underwater, then the motion of the water is to one direction, while the motion of the cavities is at angle of 90° with respect to that of the water (drawing below). The faster the propeller is turning, the more extended is the water swirl and the more compacted is the cavities’ helix.
image
The motion of the water corresponds to the motion of the electric wind; the motion of the cavities corresponds to the magnetic wind.

Please watch these two short YouTube videos (the first only on YouTube from 2:24 on the timeline):

Although the electromagnetic element is represented by straight lines, it is only a symbolic representation. Each line represents a flux, and the many elementary fluxes unify themselves in a single electromagnetic flux (principle of self-similarity).

The E and M-segments could be imagined as helical gears.

Probably it seems inconsistent that we draw the EM-force element so that the arrows of both E-segments point from their sources outwards on the one hand, while on the other hand we say that the one force has a suctioning effect. Hence, its arrow should have been drawn in the opposite direction. However, the direction of the arrows does not refer to whether the force acts from the source outwards or inwards, but rather to the effect of the action of both E-segments on the M-segment, that is, on its righting with respect to the wire line.

Quotation from Hans Christian Oersted (21 July, 1821): “All the effects on the north pole above-mentioned are easily understood by supposing that negative electricity moves in a spiral line bent towards the right, and propels the north pole, but does not act on the south pole. The effects on the south pole are explained in a similar manner, if we ascribe to positive electricity a contrary motion and power of acting on the south pole, but not upon the north. The agreement of this law with nature will be better seen by a repetition of the experiments than by a long explanation. The mode of judging of the experiments will be much facilitated if the course of the electricities in the uniting wire be pointed out by marks or figures.”

Quotation from Michael Faraday (1822): “The theory of M.Oersted, therefore, seems to require that there be two electric fluids; that they be not either combined or separate, but in the act of combining so as to produce an electric conflict; that they move nevertheless separate from each other, and in opposite spiral directions, through and round the wire; and that they have entirely distinct and different magnetical powers; the one electricity (negative) propelling the north pole of a magnet, but having no action at all on the south pole; the other electricity (positive) propelling the south pole, but having no power over the north pole.
I have before said, that I am not able to comprehend the whole of the Professor's statement, and, perhaps, therefore, ought not to send you any account of it. It is to be hoped, however, that this celebrated philosopher will shortly develope the principles more at large, which have already led him to the results he has published; and there can be no doubt that in pursuing them he will arrive at other results as new to the world, as important to science, and as honourable to himself, as those he has already made known.”


When a body moves through space filled with air, then higher pressure is created in front of it, while lower pressure/depressure behind it. The higher pressure is plus, the lower pressure is minus. I use to call this a ‘principle of an arrow’ (− >—> +).
image
The greater the velocity of the body is, the stronger is the Plus in front of it as well as the Minus behind it. This principle can be found in many things, among others also in the so-called “Bernoulli’s principle”.
The cavitation of the underwater propeller is actually the Minus - the Negative of the water motion. Similarly, the magnetic current is the Negative of the electric current. In other words, the electricity is Plus, the magneticity is Minus. This is a polarity of first order. There is further once more a Plus and a Minus both in electricity and in magneticity. It is a polarity of second order.

P.S. More systematically explained and with many more details and experimental evidence, you can read here:

2 Likes

Let me congratulate you , @Mitko_Gorgiev , you are 100% right ! The science fraternity may not acknowledge you today , but they will have to -ultimately !

Your analogy of a propellor inside water , is bang on - the same laws of nature are applicable...the mistake mainstream science makes is to regard all phenomena as being driven by matter , as represented by themselves as those rigid , miniature billiard balls called electrons , protons and neutrons - always bouncing off one another !

You have brilliantly concluded that matter is nothing but condensed (or crystallised) energy...my 2 cents on this is that energy itself is nothing but concentrated consciousness and so we have this continuum in nature with consciousness as the ultimate substrate of reality :))

Have you read the works of Viktor Schauberger such as "Living Water" ? I think you will find several more relevant analogies from his work on water that maybe applicable to electromagnetism...your comments on helical movement too find resonance with the torsion inherent in the flow of water .

At a deeper level of reality , both electrical current and the flow of water are driven by energy vortices - a fundamental characteristic of nature across all scales , sub-atomic to galactic...!

Regards

1 Like

Thank you very much @sidharthabahadur.
My "problem" is that I could never believe that some tiny particles move through the metal wires, especially because I have never seen experimental evidence which support that theory. So, I consider it only a story without any grounds. Those people who believe that there are experimental evidence, they actually don't know exactly what they are talking about.
So, for me, it is just a new religion. A new religion whose supreme Deity is called ATOM.

About Viktor Schauberger I have seen only this very interesting video:

P.S. I always want to write something more, but I am very slow with my English.
I am very sorry for that.

1 Like

@Mitko_Gorgiev no worries about language limitations - obviously it has the widest population reach and is needed / desirable, BUT you may feel free to post non-English remarks and then temporarily translate them with DeepL Language Translator (deepl.com/translator) and then modify the remarks if you think it should be worded / phrased differently.

I suspect that it will not get all of your thoughts quite right since this is not "mainstream science" and it may not be trained with the wording and ideas you may want to convey / share.

We don't want to slow you down or handicap your thoughts and creative process!

1 Like

@Mitko_Gorgiev , you have found such an excellent video summarising Viktor Schauberger's work - I have read all his 3 books on water...which is still very poorly understood by mainstream science :))

The real beauty of water is how it mimics the behaviour of the ether itself...as it's very challenging to study the ether , water can be a convenient substitute .

Electromagnetism flows in a very similar fashion to water - then one may ask , how is mainstream science still able to derive meaningful outcomes basis of their warped understanding of water and even electricity . Well , the answer is what the mainstream has , is a good approximation of how nature reacts , without really understanding in depth , nature itself !

Till mainstream science ends their obsession with "physical/tangible MATTER" the sciences will continue to languish . The day they embrace , toroidal vortexes of energy as the fundamental building block of our universe , scientific progress will fast forward by hundreds of years !

Regards

Regards

@Mitko_Gorgiev , you have found such an excellent video summarising Viktor Schauberger's work - I have read all his 3 books on water...which is still very poorly understood by mainstream science :))

The real beauty of water is how it mimics the behaviour of the ether itself...as it's very challenging to study the ether , water can be a convenient substitute .

Electromagnetism flows in a very similar fashion to water - then one may ask , how is mainstream science still able to derive meaningful outcomes basis of their warped understanding of water and even electricity . Well , the answer is what the mainstream has , is a good approximation of how nature reacts , without really understanding in depth , nature itself !

Till mainstream science ends their obsession with "physical/tangible MATTER" the sciences will continue to languish . The day they embrace toroidal vortexes of energy as the fundamental building block of our universe , scientific progress will fast forward by hundreds of years !

Regards

1 Like

Folks , another common mistake mainstream science makes in understanding electric current , is to treat the electron as a perfectly spherical and HARD , shiny ball that somehow , MAGICALLY , carries a negative electric charge (they can't even convincingly explain what electrical charge ACTUALLY is) ??

There are scientists who boldly claim to have measured the radius of electrons , protons and neutrons - but how do you measure the radius of a miniature cloud , how do you measure the radius of something intangible or diffused (something that has wave/particule duality) ???? Moreover , by bringing in the Quantum weirdness and random behaviour of such entities and bizarre phenomena like non-locality of time & space , it becomes even more challenging to make precise measurements...! Remember Heisenberg's uncertainty principle ?

The only reason mainstream theories get away with all their "fluff" is because they are somehow able to mathematically derive frameworks which can approximate reality to within a tolerable degree of deviation , without actually understanding the true nature of reality :))

In reality , at the level of electrons or rather electron CLOUDs , things get really fuzzy and uncertain , so explaining the "flow" of electricity in the form of a neat conveyor belt of these miniature billiard balls , all moving obediently in one direction , is incredibly naive , indeed funny - but guess what - all of us were taught electricity at school , in exactly this insane manner :))

Regards

2 Likes

:100:% @sidharthabahadur

Everything Atom is energy state. Atoms are observed in states or time. All observable matter is a replication at a conscious level, like taking a picture of a bird in flight. Science captures states and gives them an interpretation that is not the whole so our perception is altered and limited subconsciously.

M

It would be interesting @Mitko_Gorgiev to compare and contrast your work and research with that of Ionel Dinu. Would love to hear your thoughts on these in relation to your own insights. Here are some previous discussions:

For example, you may find his concept of replacing electrons with "electrigen" to be an interesting concept:

A collection of his papers (updated with his most recent paper):

2 Likes

@Echo_on , I really like your analogy around snapshots of a bird in flight...it also reminds me of the renowned Quantum physicist Schrodinger's analogy of a cat - dead or alive !

You see , modern science seems to abandon all logic (or simply glosses over it) given their obsession to describe all sub-atomic phenomena in terms of HARD , MATERIAL , perfectly spherical objects (nature does NOT make perfectly straight lines or perfect spheres)...they stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that every"thing" is just made up of intangible energy & that an atom is 99.999 % empty space !