Adapted for the Internet from:Why God Doesn't Exist

Summary

Man has known about magnets since antiquity, yet the mathematicians have no idea how two magnets
attract or repel each other. Here I contrast the 'field' explanation offered  by the Quantum mathematicians
against the version suggested by the rope hypothesis of light. Whereas the Quantum field description is
supernatural, the rope version enables you to visualize the underlying physical process of magnets.

Notes:

1.      This page is an introduction to the magnetic mechanism. Its purpose is not to explain
every aspect of magnetism, but to illustrate in a few pictures how magnets attract and
repel. Unjustified assumptions are beyond the scope of this page (for example, how
the ropes avoid tangling, atomic configuration, etc.). This page is merely an overview
of the physical interpretation of magnetic attraction and repulsion. Its purpose is to

2.       At the end of this page you will be able to see a simplified, dynamic version of
attraction and repulsion.

The patterns you see in Fig. 1 appears when we sprinkle iron filings around a common magnet. In Fig. 2 we
see a schematic of both attraction and reflection patterns. The Sun's magnetic 'fields' also exhibit these
patterns (Fig. 3).
 How a magnet physically attracts another
 The explanation Thread Theory offers for magnetic attraction and repulsionClick on the magnets below...

________________________________________________________________________________________

 Fig. 2   The attraction and repulsion patterns formed by iron filings
 The 'description' offered by Mathematical PhysicsSo what are those arrows that are going into the southand coming out of the north poles of the magnet?Particles? Vectors? Magnetic moments? Energy?Why do two magnets physically attract each other, you stupid relativist?

3.   How magnets attract

The mathematical physicists divide a magnet into north and south or positive and negative without indicating
how this nomenclature relates to physical behavior. Under the rope hypothesis, a magnet is divided into top
and bottom. In  Fig. 5, top atoms of both magnets swing EM threads CW and bottom atoms of both magnets
swing EM threads CCW. I have color coded a few of the top threads blue and red merely to indicate their
sources. The blue-red color coding is there to illustrate conventional north-south, positive-negative
orientations. The blue-red color coding is unrelated to any physical property. The mathematicians have been
utterly fooled by Mother Nature. They were so fascinated by the attractive and repulsive phenomena they
observed at ends of magnets that they never considered the orthogonal top/bottom axis, the one underlying
the physical reason for these phenomena.

Top threads from the left magnet swing CW and through the middle of the magnet (Green Arrows). Bottom
threads from this magnet swing CCW, collide with top threads, and also end up running through the middle of
the magnet (Yellow Arrows). Predictably, force is through the middle of the magnet. Think of a magnet as a
solenoid, with 'force' moving through the coil.

The magnet on the right hand is also divided into top and bottom. Top threads swing CW and bottom threads
swing CCW. CW spinning top threads of the left magnet engage CW spinning top threads of the one on the
right like the brothers in Fig. 4 A and B. Think of two CW spinning gears or riverboat paddle wheels meshing
into each other. They will attract each other. CCW spinning bottom threads of one magnet engage CCW
spinning threads of the other and draw the two magnets together. The closer the magnets are to each other,
the more threads that intervene, the stronger the attraction, and the faster the magnets are drawn to each
other. This explains the inverse square rule (Fig 7). If we now revert the right hand magnet and turn it upside
down so that D and C are exchanged (Fig. 6), the magnets continue to attract each other. Top threads
continue swinging CW and bottom threads continue swinging CCW. The rotation of the magnet around this
axis did not affect its properties. It is when we switch  E and F with C and D (Fig. 8) that the ropes are now
aligned like the brothers in Fig. 4 C and D.
 Fig. 1 AttractionClassical iron filing patterns around two magnets having opposite polarities.
 2.   The rope version of magnetic attraction and repulsion
 1.   The two Quantum versions of magnetic attraction and repulsion
 Fig. 6   AttractionOverturning the magnets in the north-southdirection (switching D with C) produces no change.We still have attraction consistent with observation.
 Fig. 5   AttractionSouth (blue) of one magnet faces north (red) of another. They generate attraction consistent withthe mechanism illustrated in Fig. 4 A and B.
 Pushy Billdrawing a lot of bullshit from the mechanics
 Fig. 4   Swinging ropes
 Fig. 7   How magnets attract:  another perspective
 Compare...
 vs.
 1.       In the first animation, you have A and B of the left magnet facing C and D of theright magnet. Top threads swing CW and bottom threads swing CCW. It is important to check the CURVED ARROWS at the top and bottom margins of the drawings to verify which way the threads swing.2.       In the second movie, we switch C and D, and there is no change. Top threadsswing CW and bottom threads swing CCW.3.       In the third movie, we switch E and F for C and D. Top threads of the left magnetswing CW, but top threads of the right magnet now swing CCW. Bottom threads of the left magnet continue swinging CCW, but bottom threads of the right magnet now swing CW. The result is repulsion.
 Fig. 8   Repulsion
 Now we turn the magnets in the east-west direction so that E and F of the right magnet face A and B of the left magnet (Blue facing blue). The magnets should repel each other. The threads of the left magnet continue swinging CW on the top and CCW on the bottom. However, the threads on the right magnet now swing CCw on the top and CW on the bottom. The threads are pushing their counterparts from the other magnet away consistent with the mechanism explained in Fig. 4 C and D. The farther the magnets are from each other, the fewer threads that intervene, and the weaker the force of repulsion. This mechanism accounts for the inverse square rule.
 In the illustration, the straight white lines on both magnets are spinning CW. The curved white lines represents the itinerary they describe consistent with patterns observed on iron filings. Threads that originate in atoms at the edge of the magnet extend farther than threads originating in atoms comprising the center of the magnet. Thus, thread density decreases farther away from a magnet. This constitutes the magnetic 'field' that the mathematicians have been talking about for 200 years. Threads from both magnets superimpose in the region between the magnets and cause attraction consistent with the mechanism explained in Figs. 4 A and B.
 We see the twins, Axel and Rod skipping their respective ropes a little too close to each other. There are two scenarios:

Quantum Version 1: domains

Quantum and Classical Mechanics have two physical interpretations for these patterns. The 'domain' version
proposes that a magnet can be divided into regions in which the atoms spin in a given direction. The
electricians have yet to understand how these domains physically generate attraction. Again, Mathematical
Physics is 100% descriptive. A mathematician describes. He never explains anything. Here's the official
explanation of domains at How Stuff Works. Incongruously, you'll find it under their 'science' section:

" The field exerts torque on the material, encouraging the domains to align. There's
a slight delay, known as hysteresis, between the application of the field and the
change in domains -- it takes a few moments for the domains to start to move.
Here's what happens:

The magnetic domains rotate, allowing them to line up along the north-south lines
of the magnetic field. [Why? What physical agent causes them to behave this way?]
Domains that already pointed in the north-south direction become bigger as the
domains around them get smaller. [Why?]   Domain walls, or borders
between the neighboring domains, physically move to accommodate domain
growth. [Why?] In a very strong field, some walls disappear entirely. [Why?]" [1]

In the religion of Quantum Mechanics, it all happens by magic. The mechanics merely tells you what he
observes and not what invisible agent is causing the effect. This is a description and not an explanation. This
is not Science!

Quantum version 2: Particles, charges, and fields

Quantum and Classical Mechanics also have a field version if you didn't like the domain explanation. It's nice
to know that Mathematical Physics offers people choices. In the crazy world of Mathematics, you can choose
how you want Mother Nature to be.

A field is a concept that the idiots of  Mathematics have converted into a physical object. A field allegedly is a
cloud of discrete particles that surround a magnet. For reasons that the Devil only knows, these discrete
particles are tied to each other and magically remain faithful to the magnet that gives them origin:

" Even though an atom's electrons don't move very far, their movement is enough
to create a tiny magnetic field. [What's a field? A bunch of electrons, particles, or a
magical mathematical substance?] Since paired electrons spin in opposite
directions, their magnetic fields cancel one another out. [Plus field minus field = 0?
Okay... So what physical entity is at work here?] Atoms of ferromagnetic elements,
on the other hand, have several unpaired electrons that have the same spin. Iron,
for example, has four unpaired electrons with the same spin. Because they have no
opposing fields to cancel their effects, these electrons have an orbital magnetic
moment. [So what is a moment?] The magnetic moment is a vector -- it has a
magnitude and a direction. [In other words, a vector is a mathematical abstraction,
a description of what the mathematician observes in the lab.] It's related to both the
magnetic field strength and the torque that the field exerts. [This is a quantitative
description. We still don't know how a magnet attracts another.] A whole magnet's
magnetic moments come from the moments of all of its atoms. [Great! It's nice to
know that!]

In metals like iron, the orbital magnetic moment encourages nearby atoms to align
along the same north-south field lines. [So how does the mathematical concept
'magnetic moment'  'ENCOURAGE' particles such as atoms to align? The famous
'magnetic moment' is defined as 'measure of strength.' Can the measure compel
atoms to align?]  Iron and other ferromagnetic materials are crystalline. As they
cool from a molten state, groups of atoms with parallel orbital spin line up within
the crystal structure. [What entity induces this 'lining up'?] This forms the magnetic
domains discussed in the previous section. [Oh brother! You mean those domains
you talked about but didn't explain?]

Many other elements are diamagnetic -- their unpaired atoms create a field that weakly
repels a magnet. [Like how? You mean by waving a magic wand?]

Of course, when the presenter senses that no one in the audience understood anything, he covers his
incompetence with fine print and disclaimers at the end of the presentation:

" This explanation and its underlying quantum physics are fairly complicated, and
without them the idea of magnetic attraction can be mystifying."

Yeah! I bet!

So now you know exactly how magnets work in Quantum! Now let's look at how they really work. Let's review
a series of images that allow you to visualize how two magnets can attract or repel each other by means of
this invisible 'thing' in between them that the mechanics call 'field.'
 Fig. 3   Solar flaresMagnetic fields on the surface of the Sun show the same patterns
 C'mmon, Lulu Bell! You can do it! Push harder!I need for those magnets to attract each other!
 Attraction:    A.      Axel and Rod both swing theirropes CW. While Axel's rope comes down, Rod's rope comes up.B.      The ropes tug at each other.Repulsion:   C.      Axel and Rod face each other.Axel swings his rope CW while Rod swings it CCW.D.      The ropes collide and push eachother away (D).

Having introduced the simple mechanisms illustrated in Fig. 4, let's now extend the concepts to magnets.

Now we can compare the dynamic Quantum version against the dynamic rope version. With particles, you
have no idea how the attraction occurs...