A primer on the electrons that are the long 
sought magnetic monopoles.
Author: Reinko Venema. 


Introduction: In this html page on magnetism we will focus on a weird detail of the so called Stern-Gerlach experiment from the year 1922 where they managed to separate a stream of silver ions into two parts. 
And the culprit was one loose unpaired electron that did split this stream of silver ions. 

I was 50 years of age when I read these weird results for the first time and I did not understand them: 
The experiment used an inhomogeneous magnetic field so how could electrons choose the way of the weaker magnetic field?  

Within two days I had the answer: Electrons are magnetic monopoles because only monopoles can be repelled by the stronger side of a magnetic field. 

I was very surprised by my own result because I too was indoctrinated by 'Magnetic monopoles do no exist' kind of thinking. 

Anyway, two years back that was the starting point of the 'electrons are magnetic monopoles'. 

Have fun reading it and hopefully you will learn something from it. 
And for those who know my math pages on higher dimensional complex numbers: Here I will avoid math most of the time. 


27 Oct 2015: Ten reasons why electrons are magnetic monopoles   
12 Dec 2015: Reason 11 is found: Lamor precession versus the violin string 
21 Dec 2015: Reason 12: Nuclear fusion & the plasma instability problem  
30 Dec 2015: Reason 13: Experiments with a television tube  
08 Jan 2016: Reason 14: Even numbered atomic elements are more stable 
10 Jan 2016: Reason 15: Superconductivity explained as a monopole effect 
25 Jan 2016: Reason 16: Even numbered atomic elements are more stable. part 2 
27 Jan 2016: Reason 17: Dia-magnetism explained via magnetic monopoles 
29 Jan 2016: Reason 17.5: The combed universe  
02 Feb 2016: Reason 18: Para-magnetism explained via magnetic monopoles 

15 Feb 2016: Reason 19: The temperature of the solar corona 

17 Feb 2016: Reason 20: The plasma instability problem according to MIT 
25 Feb 2016: Reason 21: The way plasma magnetic mirrors work 
05 March 2016: Reason 22: Birkeland currents  
07 March 2016: Reason 23: Behavior of DIY plasma in a magnetic field 
20 March 2016: Reason 24: The energy levels in cosmic rays 
28 March 2016: Reason 25: Because Pauli said so 
03 April 2016: Reason 26: First evidence of particle acceleration by magnets 
23 April 2016: Reason 27: The SI units for magnetic and electrical fields 
27 April 2016: Reason 28: Localization of charge and linear polarization of light 
03 May 2016: Reason 29: Because Germans say neutrons carry magnetic moment 
12 June 2016: Reason 30: New photo's from a television experiment 
12 July 2016: Reason 31: Experimental results from JET show non confinement
11 Aug 2016: Reason 32: Why does the plasma start spinning asks Steve Cowley 
19 Aug 2016: Reason 33: Vertical displacement events in nuclear plasma's 
13 Sept 2016: Reason 34: Two famous physics professors telling nonsense
17 Sept 2016: Reason 35: Some Tokamak explosive discharges explained
03 Oct 2016: Reason 36: Solar corona temperature explained via the bonkers force
05 Oct 2016: Reason 37: Old and new experiments upon the bonkers force 
10 Oct 2016: Reason 38: The Hendrik Casimir effect and the vacuum catastrophe
14 Oct 2016: Reason 39: The acceleration of the solar wind 
27 Oct 2016: Reason 40: Electrons must conserve linear momentum, but they don't 
24 Dec 2016: Reason 41: The vacuum catastrophe part 2 
For the year 2017 this magnetic page is continued at:


27 Oct 2015: Ten reasons why electrons are magnetic monopoles.     

Welcome to the new html file related to magnetism! 

About two years ago I realized when thinking about the results of the Stern-Gerlach experiment that these results could only be explained if the electron behaved like a magnetic monopole. 
To me this was a surprise and following the standard principles of science (try to kill your own idea) the more I studied it the more I became convinced electrons were indeed magnetic monopoles, just like they have an electrical charge they also have a magnetic charge.  

For example: Reason number 10 at the end of the list is the so called Zeeman effect.
I never knew what this Zeeman effect was, after all I am not a physics guy but a math guy.
Yet also this Zeeman effect that splits the spectra of atoms and molecules can only be explained from a deeper foundation as viewing all spin half particles as magnetic monopoles. 

When you are new to this website: 

I always post my scientific updates as jpg pictures, there is no evil in that but search engines like Google cannot deal with that so you better store an old fashioned think like a bookmark in order to find this page back... 


Enough introductionary bla bla is done, the 10 reasons for electrons cover a wide variety in the diverse sciences like physics, chemistry and also astronomy things like solar wind. It is 15 pictures (about A4 size pages) long.

Have fun reading it, here is the stuff: 






























Ok, at the end of this update let us look at the Stern-Gerlach experiment from the year 1922 once more: 

There are thousands and thousands professors in the science of physics at any given year since 1922.
How come not one of them sees magnetic monopoles when looking at the S-G experiment?  

That is because they have organized their science as a substitute for religion and as such they have prophets telling them what the dogma's should be. 
For example Gauss who, without experimental evidence, explained magnetic monopoles do not exist. 

And the sheep, they follow the new shepherd...  


Useful links: 

Coulomb's law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb's_law 
Magnet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet  
Aurora Borealis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora
Giant magnetoresistance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_magnetoresistance 
Angular momentum operator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_momentum_operator 
Maser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maser 
Zeeman effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeeman_effect
Stark effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stark_effect 

Remark while reading these links, everywhere where the reasoning is based on electrons being magnetic dipoles, it is rather likely the information offered is not true for the full 100%.  

Till updates my dear reader.       





From 12 Dec 2015: Reason number 11 why electrons are magnetic monopoles is the Lamor precession as observed in for example MRI (magnetic resonance imaging).

In MRI imaging this Lamor precession is crucial because if they halt the secondary magnetic field that has a frequency of the Lamor precession, that gives the source of the image. Now a few days back I was looking at some vids about MRI imaging and those people bragged that they had a 3 Tesla primary magnet while other hospitals only had 1.5 Tesla stuff. 

And with the 3 Tesla primary magnet they had twice the Lamor frequency of the 1.5 Tesla primary magnets, for the stuff involved were protons bounded to larger molecules and for those protons the frequency was about 42 MHz/Tesla.

But I was also told that the frequency was related to how fast the proton was spinning and this sounded strange to me; how could it be that if you make the magnetic field stronger the proton would spin faster??? 

Therefore I finally dived into the math of Lamor precession, for example the next wiki is short and to the point: 

Larmor precession 

Inspecting the math details you observe it is a cross product of the so called 'magnetic moment' of the spinning particle and the magnetic field. And, this is important, it is 'just like' the classical thing of a gyroscope in our macroscopic world.
All the time these physics people tell everybody that the quantum world is so strange that you can never ever draw parallels between the quantum stuff and the macroscopic world. 

And now all of a sudden 'it is exactly like a gyroscope'. 

Now how does this relate to me thinking that all spin half particles are in fact magnetic monopoles?
Can I bring up an alternative idea that explains why the frequency is proportional to the applied magnetic field? 

Yes I can; compare it to a violin string. 

If on a violin or a guitar or any snare music instrument depending on resonance, if you stretch the snare more the frequency's it vibrates on will go higher. 

Take a human body with all of it's long and complicated molecules and put it inside a strong stationary magnetic field, what is going to happen? It is the same as a music instrument where all snares are spanned so they can vibrate.
The operator of the MRI machine puts the secondary magnetic field into action, the second magnetic field is always perpendicular to the primary magnetic field just line in music instruments the snares are always made into vibration via a force perpendicular on that snare. That goes for all music instruments: piano, guitar, harpsichord, violin etc etc.   

The secondary magnetic field inside a MRI machine always has the frequency that makes the protons resonate, of course with protons I mean the loose hydrogen atoms that are always found in carbon based chemistry. So I do not talk about protons inside the nuclei of all other matter in the human body... 


Anyway to make a long story short: Although mathematically impressive I do not buy the precession thing of spin half particles because violin stuff insights via spin half particles being magnetic monopoles give the same results. Therefore this 'reason number 11' is not a decisive killing of the spin fantasies of the professional physics professors, but all the math that the professional professors throw at it does not kill my monopole fantasies either. 


And that my dear reader is a very nice observation; all that knowledge out there, nowhere is there stuff that says spin half particles are not magnetic monopoles... 

Let me close this short update with a small picture: 


Till updates.  


 From 21 Dec 2015: Reason 12: Nuclear fusion & the plasma instability problem.

If in the year 1980 you would ask people working on experimental nuclear fusion reactors ask how long will it take before we have a more or less working nuclear fusion reactor, they would say 'Oh about 20 to 30 years or so'.   

And now in the year 2015 if you ask the same question guess what?
You would get the same answer. And of course a request for more funding because ' more research is needed'. 


For me it is more or less funny: In 35 years those people made zero point zero progress and it might very well be that at some fundamental level they do not understand there own business. Because if it is true that all spin half particles are in fact magnetic monopoles, after a bit of thinking you understand these present nuclear fusion reactors all have the same basic flaw: They keep on accelerating particles that have a magnetic monopole charge.  

But their way of thinking is like Maxwell' s law's that say magnetic monopoles do not exist...  

So it is a kind of blind spot they have, even if any other idiot can see an electron has a monopole electric charge and magnetic charge these people will be asking for more tax payer money decade in decade out. 
Best thing would be to shut down all funding, yet likely this will not happen...

Enough intro talk, the rest of this update is just five picture about the Max Planck Instute nuclear fusion reactor that is of the Stellarator type (just like that Russian design it will never fly). Only four pictures long is this update: 








End of this update upon reason number 12 as why electrons are magnetic monopoles. Till updates. 



From 30 Dec 2015: Reason nr 13: Results from experiments with an old television set.

Also known as 'particle accelerator experiments' because after all those old televisions with a tube had one electron cannon in them if it was a black & white television and three electron cannons in the case of color televisions.  

Last month I bought five of those new and strong neodymium magnets for about 30 €, the second hand television was 6 € so the overall costs of this experimental constellation was just 36 €.
I hope that at CERN in the Swiss landscape they will learn something from that, by the way did you know that at CERN they are also trying to find magnetic monopoles? But strangely enough they never find a thing. 

There are always more experiments going on and they too never ever find anything. For myself speaking I consider the theory from Paul Dirac a little bit outlandish. Paul made his contributions, for example he predicted that anti matter would be there while in those times nobody ever heard from anti matter.  


For myself speaking I consider the photo's from the experiments as more evidence, even proof, that electrons are magnetic monopoles. Electrons being magnetic dipoles violates the outcome of the results as shown below. 

This update is 7 pages long, it contains not calculation whatsoever but only text and photo's from how the electrons react on the neodymium magnets. Have fun reading it.














I hope that you see that the repelling character of the electrons in the last photo is one of the most strong arguments for electrons being magnetic monopoles. For myself speaking I am glad that these results can be repeated by anybody who likes to do that for under 50 €. The television I used comes from a local recycling shop that sells second hand goods, it is known as Mamamini. 
Please note that it might be very possible that you cannot use the television later because most of the time relatively permanent damage is done (it needs to be degaussed or made magnetic neutral again).  

Till updates. 


From 08 Jan 2016: Reason 14: Even numbered atomic elements are more stable.

This new year it was announced that there were four new elements discovered in the periodic table of elements. Now for a long time already I am thinking that for large nuclei where the strong force doesn't work properly they are only bound by the magnetic forces. Ok, this page is named monopole magnet stuff and most of the time we are talking electrons but it is reasonable to suspect all spin half particles being magnetic monopoles. 

The reason I think that more or less only magnetic forces hold the nucleus together is of course chain reaction; neutrons with only a moderate speed are capable of keeping chain reactions going on. That implies that the nucleus of large radioactive atomic elements are hold together with the force that one neutron applies... 

The Youtube website has a channel named Periodic Videos and the video in question is the next one: 

FOUR new elements (inc Japonicium and Moscovium?) - Periodic Table of Videos 

Here is a screen shot from the video: 


Now why are atomic elements at the end of the periodic table more stable if they have an even number of protons in them? I guess that this is related to proton pair forming. On an equal footing we have neutron pairs and also proton neutron pairs.  

To make it more difficult; those large nuclei often have a wide range of isotopes all having different half-life time expectations. In order to make a statistical oversight of the sum of neutrons and protons related to average radioactive decline, may be that will be done in the future.

But if you accept spin half particles are all magnetic monopoles, in that case if there are an even number of protons and also an even number of neutrons, these are the more stable isotopes on average. But the instability runs two ways: to little neutrons is unstable and too much too. So the last word on this is not spoken and in the meantime I am working on the next reason as why electrons are magnetic monopoles: Type 1 super conducting metals like tin, aluminum and so on.  

Till updates.  



From 10 Jan 2016: Reason 15: Superconductivity explained as a monopole effect. 

Finally I dived into the superconductivity and in this update we only look at the classic stuff known as type 1 and type 2.
It has to be remarked however that those high temperature weird things that experimental physics folks hunt these last decades is sometimes also known as type 2. 

So for myself I use the next types: 

Type 1 is a pure metal (wire) like a tin or aluminum wire.
Type 2 is a mixed metal wire, not those complicated fragile high temperature things.  

Two updates ago we had that thundering success with the old television and the new neodymium permanent magnets and we showed via experiments that electrons were repelled and attracted. Because of that blistering success and the low costs involved (less than 50 €) I will take the freedom in this update to use the concept of electron magnetic monopole as a given fact. And as such we will look at superconductivity looking for things that challenge our view on the magnetic monopole characteristics as we understand them at present date. 

In this update I introduce the concept of a stream of electron pairs as magnetic filaments, this concept should be taken with a few grains of salt since it is very possible align is such a way as we have two dimensional 'river streams' of electrons. So do not think I am married for life with these magnetic filaments, but they are worth thinking about a little bit.  

This is a short update, only four pages long & here we go: 








Useful links: 


At CERN they have an old but useful teachers page on superconductivity:


And from the CERN page we have the next link (over there they view type 2 superconductors as those fragile modern thingelings, but anyway) 

Superconductor Information for the Beginner 


Ok, this was reason number 15. Till updates. 



From 25 Jan 2016: Reason 16: Even numbered atomic elements are more stable; part 2. 

This is a short update because today I found 3 strong clues as why all spin half particles have to be magnetic monopoles. Therefore we have two pages in the jpg format explaining that the nucleus of atomic stuff could indeed ruled by the stuff known as 'magnetic monopole theory'. 

Of course in practice the scientists from the overpaid universities still worship the Maxwell equations that are given to them like the 10 Commandments. I have nothing to do with such kind of human behavior, so here are just two jpg formatted pictures:  




These two graphs are from the stone age of the internet age, here is the source of the graphs as used in this reason number 16 as why spin half particles are magnetic monopoles: 

The Shell Model of Nuclear Structure 

Till updates.  


27 Jan 2016: Reason 17: Dia-magnetism explained via magnetic monopoles. 

If you see diamagnetism for the first time it just baffles your mind: How the hell is it possible that a lot of common materials like water and wood are always repelled by a magnetic field?

And it does not matter how you apply such a magnetic field, with a south or a north pole? 
The stuff gets slightly repelled by both magnetic sides.
Hold your magnet parallel to the stuff? Idem dito: It always gets repelled. 

The repelling is very weak but you can easily measure it.
And nowadays we have those new very strong neodymium magnets, for just a few € or $ you can do experiments that the noble scientists of the past could only dream of... 

This update is another short update; only two jpg pages long.
But if electrons are magnetic monopoles and the electron pair is the smallest possible magnetic dipole, if we combine the ideas suddenly diamagnetism is just another form of minimizing the energy load. 

And stuff having minimal energy is a long standing principle is the science of physics.
Here are the two pages in the jpg format:  




The floating neodymium magnet is from a Youtubber that you can find here: 

Diamagnetic Levitation Via Bismuth. No Power Supply, No Tricks, Just Science. :) RWGresearch.com 

In order to understand how present physics views diamagnetism, here is a wiki with how they see stuff: 


Needless te say I view the stuff very different: Diamagnetism is just local superconductivity because the electron pairs start spinning around to push back the fresh incoming magnetic flux changes. 


End of this small update, till updates.     


29 Jan 2016: Reason 17.5: The combed universe.

Actually this is not a stand alone reason, we need the principle of the combed universe in order to explain things like radio astronomy or in chemistry the Hund rule for the electron cloud around an atom.
For example this the Hund rule says that for example if you have four unpaired electrons in the outer shell of an atom, they all have spin up. Of course in our language is that the higher energy magnetic monopole property. 

Both the science of physics and chemistry explain very poorly why the electrons behave like they do, the Hund rule is correct but is are the root cause that brings this rule to life explained. 

In this small two page update I explain the combed universe from the viewpoint of electro-magnetic heat. For electrons em-heat are all photons with wavelength below 21 cm. (Because 21 cm wavelength is caused by electrons falling from the high energy to the low energy magnetic monopole state.)

Here are the two pages. 




So far for the combed up universe, I have to remark that when I found out most interstellar hydrogen was not in the lowest possible energy state I was very puzzled by that. Man oh man, I just discovered that spin half particles were the long sought magnetic monopoles and guess what? Most of the universe had like sticking north pole electron sticking to north pole proton... 

We can learn more from this: If the universe is constantly combed up by photons with a wavelength below 21 cm, it is rather likely that magnetic charge of electrons is not ruled by a conservation law. 
But in the past I thought that magnetism 'just like electric charge' would abide a charge conservation law so that is why I say 'rather likely' this time.  

Ok, enough of the bla bla bla. Till updates.   


02 Feb 2016: Reason 18: Para-magnetism explained via magnetic monopoles. 

In my high school years I learned that oxygen had 8 protons and as such a not ionized oxygen molecule O2 had two electron pairs that did bind the two molecules. The other 12 electrons were divided over the two oxygen atoms that supposedly each had 3 more electron pairs...  

There is a tiny problem with this: If oxygen would only have electron pairs, according to my theory of electrons being the long sought magnetic monopoles, oxygen would not be magnetic. And the tiny problem is that oxygen is magnetic, it is weakly magnetic due to unpaired electrons in the outer shells of the atom and that is known as para-magnetism. 

Basically para-magnetic materials is everything you cannot turn into permanent magnets.
This is also why I posted the last update with reason number 17.5: The combed universe. (See the above update.) 

In this 3 page update we take a deeper look at this stuff from the field of the chemical sciences, I found out that beside the rather simple electron pair theory for atoms there is a more advanced version covering the formation of orbitals for the electrons in molecules. And in this molecular orbital theory there are so called 'anti bonding orbitals' that are always found in the higher dimension regions. (Hence for this update I needed reason 17.5 from a few days back.) 

Now to make a long story short, there is a perfect video on Youtube from the Harvard university where they conduct a perfect experiment with liquid oxygen and nitrogen. Now molecular nitrogen N2 has two less electrons hence in this combed up universe it will have only paired electrons and as such a big difference is expected when it comes to magnetic properties. 

This is indeed the case, see the Harvard video: 

Para-magnetism of oxygen

Let me hang in the three pages (pictures): 




Note: With misleading I mean they should not use a + and - sign but magnet colors like red and blue... 


End of this 3 page update containing reason number 18 as why spin half particles are all magnetic monopoles.
Till updates.  


15 Feb 2016: Reason 19: The temperature of the solar corona.

I was watching one of those beautiful video's from NASA where the sun is photographed in ultra-violet light, we cannot see that with the human eye so the result of those uv-photo's is downgraded in frequency so we can view a line of such photo's as a video.
It takes a team about 10 hours work to produce one minute of such video. 

Anyway the female scientist told stuff like 'The temperature of the corona of the sun is about 600 thousand degrees Celcius while the outer layer of the sun is only 6000 degrees. This higher temperature is explained by the magnetic forces of our sun; our sun is very active when it comes to magnetism'. 

So there is where I stamp on the breaks; In the update on diamagnetism (Reason 17 from 27 Jan this year) we observed that elements and/or molecules with only electron pairs were not magnetic. Regardless of electrons being magnetic monopoles or magnetic dipoles, an electron pair is a magnetic dipole by definition and as such in general the forces of an outside magnetic field always compensate one another.

Now in reason number 17 I told you that I thought there was that small repelling effect because electron pairs likely start spinning like small propellers where I explained this effect via the minimalization of energy. 

Now if the physics people are right and electrons are magnetic dipoles, in that case they can never ever be accelerated by the magnetic fields the sun bursts out. Hence the particles of the solar corona are magnetic monopoles and not dipoles. 

Furthermore, since the entire corona has this 100 times higher temperature, this serves as a strong reason also the protons and the occasional neutron are magnetic monopoles. That is in line with what I have been saying all this time: all spin half particles are magnetic monopoles. 

This reason number 19, the temperature of the solar corona, is in line with reason number 2 where I state that the polar lights caused by the solar wind only follow the magnetic field lines of the earth magnetic field because they are magnetic monopoles. So all my 19 reasons have all these interconnections where are clues that electrons might be magnetic dipoles are nowhere to be found. 

Ok ok, if an electron is spinning around some axis it will also produce a very small dipole magnetic field but lot's of people claim it should be spinning about 100 times the speed of light in order to explain the magnetic strength of electrons. Hence if the outer layer of an electron spins about the speed of light this will explain about 1% of the observed magnetic properties. 

That brings us close to the end of reason number 19 on the magnetic monopoles stuff.
I only have one picture in this update: 


Source of the picture is from a NASA video: NASA | Thermonuclear Art – The Sun In Ultra-HD (4K)

Before we really close this update I want to ask you a question: 

All those physics professionals like those that work at NASA, CERN or wherever they work, if they have to explain the Maxwell equations they have no problem with telling that magnetic monopoles do not exist. 

And for example just one hour later when they have to explain those pictures and video's from our sun they have no problem with stating that those particles follow the magnetic field lines. 

My question is: Do these scientist use religious or scientific logic while answering these two problems?

After all, scientific logic always has this coherent thing in it. And after my humble opinion the Maxwell equations do not make clear as why elementary particles should follow magnetic field lines anyway. 

End of reason number 19, till updates.  


17 Feb 2016: Reason 20: The plasma instability problem according to MIT.

On 21 Dec 2015 I spoke for the first time about the plasma instability problem when it comes to nuclear fusion. In it I made it very clear that electrons and protons will behave very differently and taken into account that spin half particles are magnetic monopoles the plasma will split into two streams going into each other. 

On 21 Jan 2016 the MIT people published a video on Youtube stating there were two types of turbulence inside nuclear plasma, one type for electrons and one type for the nucleus of hydrogen atoms (so for the protons).
They used very expensive super computers to find this result while if you just had read this page you could have found that with 2 cents of wisdom. 

It is now year number 3 I am telling about spin half particles being magnetic monopoles. but the retards from the universities and academia refuse to go against the writings of the Prophet Maxwell (may peace be upon him). And as such the university retards confirm once more they are only on earth to waste the taxpayer money...

Mow the MIT people point to another problem: the loss of heat. This loss is not explained by their 'theoretical models'...

The heat loss is directly related to the fact that the overwhelming majority of energy will go into the electrons and not in the protons, here I am talking about the containment in the vessel energy from the magnetic fields.
In Germany at the Max Planck institute they also use micro wave radiation to heat the plasma, the video does not say if the MIT people use that too but if you only use magnetic fields to speed up the plasma it is very logical you will experience heat loss. 

A last word about the 'theoretical models' those MIT people use: If electrons and protons were really magnetic dipoles as the Prophet Maxwell says, in that case they could never ever be confined by magnetic fields because all forces on the plasma particles will be neutralized. So one way or the other, in those weird theoretical models they have the particles must have some magnetic charge. Likely they will call that 'intrinsic spin' because otherwise after they die, they will not go to the eternal physics lab in heaven sitting at the right side of Einstein talking about spin half particles.  


But serious: What an entire department brings up at MIT is what I could have told you long before that.
And I am not even a physicists...  

The video is 2.03 min, the most relevant part is at 1.29 min where the female speaker brings up the two types of turbulence in the model of the plasma as they run it on a super computer. 


Video: One step closer to fusion power  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLI6QW2x4Lg

Ok, now you are at the end of reason number 20. Till updates. 


25 Feb 2016: Reason 21: The way plasma magnetic mirrors work.

When atoms are stripped from their electrons it is important to be able to lock up the resulting plasma. In earlier reasons above we looked already at plasma vessels like the Tokamak and the Stellarator from the Max-Planck institute. 

But there are more ways the plasma can be contained, it a linear fashion you can contain the plasma with so called magnetic mirrors. And if you analyse this a little bit soon you see the only if electrons and protons are magnetic monopoles, they will not pass the mirror if their speed is not high enough. 

It is a pity I have no access to plasma myself, let alone have some budget for experiments because if you have deuterium that has a nucleus of one proton and one neutron, a fraction of that deteurium should be magnetic dipoles because the proton and neutron will have opposite magnetic charges. And if you have far more leakage of deuterium compared to loose protons or tritium, that would prove as one more reason as why nuclear particles like protons and neutrons are also magnetic monopoles. 

Here is a picture of how such magnetic mirrors work in theory. I think that in practice the particle cloud will split in half, but first take a look at the picture (source of this picture: Cosmos Magazine):  


Before we have observed that particles like this will only go along magnetic field lines if they have a magnetic monopole net charge. If electrons were magnetic dipoles of equal strength, the electrons could freely move in all directions. 

Let us do a small thought experiment (ein gedanken experiment mit ein bier dazu):
You are a south pole monopole electron in the yellow cloud, what do you feel?
From the left coil you feel attaction because the north pole is on the inside of the containment space &
From the right coil you feel repulsion because the south pole is in the containment space.
Hence you will move to the left. 

But what happens when you fly through the coil?
Suddenly you are in a south field but you are a south monopole yourself!
Hence, if you did not fly too hard you will be pushed back into the containment space.
And if you flew too hard you made it outside in the free world and the south pole of the left coil will push you further and further away...

And last but not least: suppose now you are a magnetic dipole. You approach the coil and in the middle you feel the magnetic field is 'going north to south. You would simply rotate until newly aligned with the magnetic field and simply fly through the left coil. Once more the magnetic monopole idea survives while the dipole idea does not make it.

End of the thought experiment. 

Now in pictures like this you often see the path of particles represented by those spirals. That is not impossible if it is a reflection of the Lorentz force at work. Electrically charged particles moving perpendicular in a magnetic field feel a force perpendicular on them and as such they have a tendency to go around in circles. Neutrons don't do that, for electrons this is easy to verify via experiment and protons have too much mass to make an easy experiment but should go around in circles to if they move perpendicular to the magnetic field. 

So in a nutshell this is reason number 21: Magnetic south monopole spin half particles are trapped by the left coil because if they fly through they get repelled and pushed back. Magnetic north monopole spin half particles are trapped by the right coil.  

Once more we observe: No matter in what corner of physics, always the idea that electrons or more general all spin half particles are magnetic monopoles, this idea cannot be destroyed no matter how hard I try to find a reason in the opposite way... 

Thanks for your attention, till updates.  


05 March 2016: Reason 22: Birkeland currents.

Once more this is not an independent reason but I came across a very nice photo, I think the photo is from about 1908 and it shows an attempt by the Norwegian guy Birkeland to mimic the Aurora Borealis and the Australian version of it all. 

The Aurora Borealis is of course solar wind that because of it's magnetic monopole character on the particle level lands on the magnetic North & South poles of the earth magnetic field. If a particle follows magnetic field lines it has to be a magnetic monopole. Every person with just three working brain cells can think that up...

The photo is from the next link: Birkeland current http://www.plasma-universe.com/Birkeland_current

Here is the photo: %inserten 04-03-2016=Birkeland_anode_globe


The thing in the middle is the anode (so it has a positive potential on it and as such attacks the electrons), it is also a permanent magnet. Now I constantly say that electrons are magnetic monopoles, so why are all electrons coming from above to the magnetic north pole?

This has a simple explanation: Look for example at the binding energy in the hydrogen atom, it is 13.6 electron volt or a bit more precise -13.6 eV because you have to feed it a photon with 13.6 eV or more to separate the electron from the Hydrogen nucleus. The binding energy in the electron pair is much smaller, drPhysicsA said once it is about 0.3 eV. Likely it is the energy in the famous 21 cm radiation because if one of the electrons absorbs or sends out this 21 cm it is no longer an electron pair. 
Monopole electrical charges create forces that are much stronger compared to magnetic monopole charges.    

These Birkeland currents feed the Aurora's so you can see this reason 22 as some addendum to reason number 2. 




Before I close this update let me give you a link where amateur folks like me experiment a bit of their own with plasma. Now I do not have a strong pump or high voltage but the determined mind can make plasma at home. 
I made some experiments with an old television costing 6 or 8 € and the conclusion was: electrons are magnetic monopoles.

The next video shows a guy that can make plasma but he does not understand it contains both diamagnetic stuff as also magnetic monopoles. So he is in the same hole as the pppp (pppp= professional physics plasma professors):  

Extreme High Voltage: Plasma Interactions with External Magnetic Field

Till updates.  


07 March 2016: Reason 23: Behavior of DIY plasma in a magnetic field. 

Two days after the previous update we proceed with the same Youtube video from the day before yesterday: 

Extreme High Voltage: Plasma Interactions with External Magnetic Field

Please remark that this guy can make some DIY home made plasma (that is not so hard you need an old magnetron, a vacuum pump, a solid glass and some rubber ring) but he does not understand why the plasma behaves as it does.
Furthermore this kind of low voltage plasma should not be confused with the plasma as used in for eample the Wendelstein X-7 from the Max-Planck institute or the ITER project in France; this is just some ionized air that was in the jar. 

But the guy from the video observes correctly there are two kinds of plasma if you split it down how it behaved on the permanent magnets he has. The white stuff behaves as a diamagnetic material, in reason 17 from 27 Jan 2016 I explained how materials like water are diamagnetic because the electron pairs start spinning in order to reduce the changing magnetic flux. The two magnetic monopoles from the electron pair get pushed apart a little bit by the penetrating magnetic field, as such the pair has a bit more energy and using the principle that nature whenever possible always tries to get to the lowest energy state the pair starts spinning creating a counter magnetic field. 

This explains perfectly why stuff like water behaves like it does under the influence of magnetic fields. No matter how you approach the water, both a north and a south pole give precisely the same reaction only the way the electron pairs spin is different.  

Now in the video with the DIY home made plasma you observe this in a perfect way:
If the guy approaches the white blob with the north pole of his permanent magnet, the white blob goes to the left.
If the guy approaches the white blob with the south pole of his permanent magnet, the white blob goes to the right.

Of course there are more magnetic fields in the plasma, for example the one caused by the electrons going from the cathode to the anode gives at least only more magnetic field. And the combined magnetic forces let the white blob behave the way it does because the electron pairs are now spinning in the opposite direction. 

So the behavior of this white blob is experimental evidence of reason 17 while reason 17 was solely build on the assumption that electrons are magnetic monopoles... 


Intermezzo from 10 March: Today I realized there is another reason the white blob changes position when you approach it with the south pole of the permanent magnet instead of the north pole. It goes like this: 

In reason 17 we brought up the proposal that electron pairs start spinning when an outside magnetic field is applied. But if they start spinning like a propeller of an airplane, not only do we have some electrical charge spinning round.
There are also two magnetic charges spinning round, according to the basic building block of electrical generators this creates an electric field. 

Now when the video guy approached the plasma with the north pole of his permanent magnet and he changes that with the south pole of the permanent magnet, of course the electric fields inside the plasma tell the white blob to act differently...

So the diamagnetic white blob moves according to the magnetic and electrical fields that are present in the plasma. 

End of the 10 March intermezzo.  


After the white blob movement, the guy in the video touches the glass with his permanent magnet and we observe that blue stuff that is always attracted by the permanent magnet. What is it?

It can be electrons or atomic nuclei that are only partially stripped from their electrons and still have unpaired electrons in their orbitals. Most likely it are electrons but of course I cannot prove this. 
If this blue stuff are electrons, the attraction is caused by the magnetic monopole character of electrons.
If this blue stuff are atomic nuclei with at least one unpaired electron left, we usually call that paramagnetic. 

Although it has a lousy quality, I would like to include the three screen shots with:
On top: white blob to the left,
In the middle: white blob to the right, and 
On bottom: blue stuff attracting to the permanent magnet.


At the end I would like to remark that the so called 'plasma stability problem' that we observe decade in decade out in all setups for commercial nuclear fusion is caused by the simple fact you can never contain plasma that beside diamagnetism also has particles like electrons that are magnetic monopoles. 

This is impossible because the way you confine diamagnetic particles is the way for electrons to break free and vice versa.

If true this implies all present day designs for nuclear fusion will never ever work... 

Till updates.  


20 March 2016: Reason 24: The energy levels in cosmic rays

Cosmic rays are not rays but very high charged particles that once they come into the atmosphere of the earth and react with the matter there, produce a shower of second hand particles and\or gamma rays. Gamma rays are rays; extremely high frequency radiation produced by the interaction with cosmic rays.

Now in the universe there are these giant magnetic fields, not only on the sun or earth but the Milky Way on it's own has a giant magnetic field too. This giant field falls apart in two components; a stable component that stretches out in inter-galactic space and local a far more diverse magnetic field often contained into the spiral arms of our galaxy. 
The ppp differ in thinking if the giant stable field is a bipolar or a quadruple one, for our use this is not relevant because we only have to show that particles can be accelerated for centuries yes even thousands of years or longer and that is what makes it plausible that the cosmic particles end up with giganormous energies.

In order to floss the brain, if memory serves at the Large Hadron Collider they only go to something like 13 TeV and here you see stuff that I have never seen: the unit Eev... 


Source of the table: Cosmic ray http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray 

Because the energies vary so wildly the cosmic rays can come from a large variety of sources, even violent flares from our sun count as cosmic rays because that is in the lower end of the energy spectrum... 

Back to our main line of reasoning when it comes to (electrically) charged particles that follow magnetic field lines: according to me if charged particles follow magnetic field lines, they must have a net magnetic charge one way or the other. 
This is the concept of magnetic monopole; no matter how hard it spins among some axis, it carries a net magnetic charge.

And if it carries a net magnetic charge, such plasma particles will always be accelerated by magnetic fields. 
Now those galactic and inter-galactic magnetic fields are very weak, but if an electron has to go 500 million light years it will be accelerated many many years.  


Ok, scientist claim they have mapped the Milky Way magnetic field. We must check the details because these people think that electrons are magnetic dipoles so whatever they say you must always check if the things they say are not based on such weird assumptions.  

Now the next picture I am showing you is from an animation from cosmic ray particles and once more: if this is based on electrons being magnetic dipoles such animations are always not correct. But this picture shows nicely the giant but weak magnetic field of our Milky Way:  


Of course this is a simulation, the straight lines you see are supposed to be carbon nuclei that via the method of cosmic rays are on route to planet earth. The disk you see represents our Milky Way while the curly things represent the stable magnetic field of the Milky Way.  

I know I know this is one 100% retarded if cosmic rays get their energy from the giant magnetic fields but we must never forget these people think electrons are magnetic dipoles. So a carbon nucleus as a cosmic ray particle is no problem for them... 

Source of the above screen shot:  
Colloquium, March 12th, 2015 -- Figuring out the Milky Way's Magnetic Field, and Its Surprises

This picture was found at 47.04 minutes into the talk. Copyrights hang out at the New York university. 


Ok, let me skip making a total wreckage of such stupid numerical simulations and concentrate on why it could very well be that the USA university folks have carved out a more or less accurate projection on the galactic magnetic fields.  

They used so called Faraday rotation, I never heard of this kind of rotation but it seems that in a magnetic field if radiation is polarized it rotates along the axis of going forward. Not only that, there is a beautiful equation coming with it:  


The cute formula that gives the total rotation of em radiation along lines of sigth to quasars is from the next video: 

CITA 642: The Magnetic Field of the Milky Way - A Canadian Perspective

I have to remark that the lambda square is something I would never expect, something linear with lambda would look more reasonable at first glimpse... So I have no idea as why this rotation is proportional to lambda squared. 

More on the Faraday rotation, also known as the Faraday effect in a wiki: 

Faraday effect

Ok, now why go to such depths like the Faraday effect? That is because I want to make sure the mapping out of the galactic magnetic field(s) is done properly and not based in any way of electrons being magnetic dipoles. And as far as I can see it, this work is done properly. It is not like all those plasma simulations that bear no relation to the observed behavior of plasma because the pppp use far too simple stuff for plasma modeling. (I mean if you leave out the acceleration done by the magnetic field it is very hard to get realistic results...) 


Another very interesting detail is found with the Fermi high energy telescope; above and below the center of the Milky Way are two gigantic lobes measuring about 25 thousand light years and these lobes are a source of gamma rays suggesting there are significant more cosmic rays in these lobes.

All nicely in line with the idea that the galaxy has a stable magnetic field and that spin half particles are in fact magnetic monopoles.  


Now it took some work to find these lobes because the Fermi high energy telescope is a bit overblown by the energy coming from the galactic disk, but as you see on inspection these lobes fit perfect into my developing theory of magnetic monopoles. 

Video source of this picture is from Science@NASA, a very good video channel by the way. Link: 

NASA | Fermi discovers giant gamma-ray bubbles in the Milky Way


Before I close this update about cosmic rays I would like to bring to your attention a possible mechanism as why they emerge in super nova's. It is called Fermi acceleration and it is thought that after a super nova explosion some particles go over the shock wave multiple times. But even if they can cross the shockwave multiple times, the observed energies are by far not enough to be explained by that only.  

Beside this there is also the 'injection problem' that simply says why particles get enough energy to make the very first shockwave pass anyway. 

Fermi acceleration

And if you do a picture search on Fermi acceleration you can find weird stuff like the next: 


For myself speaking: I absolutely do not believe we can get those very high energy particles this way. That does not take away Fermi was a great guy but come on: It is the year 2016 and it is time to clean up a science known as physics. 

Since they are completely inert to my list of 24 reasons as why electrons are in fact magnetic monopoles, a better way could be stop funding these people with taxpayer money.  

After all they have a track record of wasting money that is very long, and all those lame excuses they have like 'We are using the scientific method' and stuff like that. If that was true, we would not be in this situation in the first place... 

End of this update, till updates.  


28 March 2016: Reason 25: Because Pauli said so.

The Pauli guy who got famous because of the Pauli exclusion principle that says no particles can have the same set of quantum numbers also said about electron spin: 

The phenomenon is clearly binary in nature and has no classical equivalent. 

Ok, may be he phrased it a bit different but it shows he very well understood the binary outcome of the Stern-Gerlach experiment. And at first he strongly opposed this stuff as if the electron was a magnetic dipole because it is spinning around an axis because Pauli was able enough to calculate the electron had to be spinning a huge multiple of the speed of light. 

Why he later gave his fiat to this weird spinning hypothesis is unknown to me, Pauli was head on with his remark that there is no equivalent in classical things like you and me & all that macro stuff around us.

People from quantum physics always say that if you try to explain quantum things you are never allowed to use things from daily life because they are macroscopic objects while the micro-cosmos from quantum mechanics is a completely different thing. 

Ok, so how do those quantum physics folks explain electron spin? 

They always come up with that torque thing, they even show you a spinning gyroscope, throw in some math with an outer product and suddenly you are supposed to believe the electron spin is coming from the electron being a spinning magnetic dipole that aligns itself under the influence of an outside applied magnetic field
More advanced explanations say that first the magnetic spin gets projected into the direction of the magnetic field and after that it becomes 'up' or 'down'. (The up/down language comes from the fact they talk about a vertical magnetic field.)

The analysis via a gyroscope is wrong because gravity applies a force on it, if the electron is spinning the application of an outside (inhomogeneous) magnetic field does indeed apply a stretching force on it but the Stern-Gerlach experiment shows this does not happen. It is binary, it is monopole behavior. 

This magnetic bipolar nonsense is from people who do not understand the math they use: Pauli said it so clearly: 


By all standards he was in the right, in our classical world we cannot make magnetic monopoles. Just like we cannot make a battery with only a + electrical current coming out... In our classical environment we cannot amass giant numbers of magnetic dipoles like electrons or other spin half particles. 

If you put a large amount of north pole electrons together, the thing is unstable because of electrical repelling forces.
It's as simple as it is. 

Let's leave it with this my dear reader.
No fancy pictures today, till updates.   


03 April 2016: Reason 26: First evidence of particle acceleration by magnets.

Once more I am using this old television set from Philips because it has three electron cannons in it and with pushing the set of six neodymium magnets against the glass we will observe that the electrons get accelerated. 

From present day theory it is known that on a moving electron acts a force done by electrical fields, this force is in the direction of the electrical field. And there is the Lorentz force that is given by the outer product of velocity and direction of the magnetic field. Because it is described by an outer product it is well known the Lorentz force is perpendicular to both the velocity of the charged particle and the field lines of the magnetic field. 

The present day knowledge is shown in the next picture together with the initial state of our triple electron cannon: 


There is a simple reason I name this piece 'First evidence of acceleration by magnets' because one way or the other inside the television there are also lots of electrical fields. Therefore this is not fundamental experimental proof but only 'first evidence'. 

An important feature of those old television tubes are the three electron cannons that ensure the three primary colors via the RGB scheme: red, green and blue. Therefore it is reasonable to expect the electrons have three different speeds with the electrons responsible for crafting the blue color having the highest energy and the low one having the lowest energy.

For the three electron cannons this means the red cannon will work with the lowest voltage and the blue cannon with the highest voltage. The electrons slam into the fluoresced screen, ramming the atoms and/or molecules into a higher energy state. After that the stuff jumps back into the ground state releasing the red, green or blue photon. 


The thing with showing the initial state of the television is to ensure you can see it is not rigged or so. 
Because if you show the pictures below to a professional physics professor they simply say 'It is photoshopped'. 

By the way, do you know there is no difference between the next two things: 

Thing 1) Explaining evolution to a creationist &
Thing 2) Explaining magnetic monopoles to a physics professor. 

Whatever you do, you will not succeed...
They will keep on hanging to their belief system whatsoever.


After having said that, let's hang in the six neodymium magnets in order to show this experiment can be repeated easily.
The next picture shows a lot of what professional professors in physics cannot explain: 


And the same stuff in the dark, I moved my hand a little bit down in order to show you the binary behavior of the electrons: 


You see a small island of impending electrons at the center of where I place the stack of neodymium magnets. Around this island there is a circular spot where electrons refuse to land and in the outer regions the three electron cannons have a complex story to tell. Anyway one of the most important observations is that around my neodymium magnets mostly the blue electrons hang around... 

Needless to say this kind of electron behavior cannot be explained by stuff like:  


Ok, let's leave it with that. 

Just like the evangelicals believing in the theory of creationism, physics people will act the same and stick to their silly beliefs. End of this update.  

Till updates.  



23 April 2016: Reason 27: The SI units for magnetic and electrical fields.

Ok, on this date 23 April 2016 it is still official theory that electrons are magnetic dipoles while at the same time they are electrical monopoles. For myself speaking I am now 52 years of age and I expect to die while the electrons are still officially magnetic dipoles.

The unfounded shit that the people of the universities & academia believe in: It is breath taking...

Yet the knowledge baked into the science of physics will carry the seeds of it's own destruction in it, otherwise it would not be a science but a religion that by definition is unable to evolve. 


Let me keep this update as short as possible: 

The SI units for electrical and magnetic fields are given by:

Electrical fields are measured in Volts per meter while,

Magnetic fields are measured in Amperes per meter.


Nowhere in the entire SI system it dives up that electrons are magnetic dipoles. No on the contrary the accepted SI units speak volumes about the symmetry there is between electrical and magnetic forces. 

So only retards will hang on to their opinion that electrons are magnetic dipoles...
And they will do that long after I have died.

Useful links from wikipdia: 

Electric field http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_field

Magnetic field  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field

Till updates my dear reader.  



 27 April 2016: Reason 28: Localization of charge and linear polarization of light.

This is a very nice update, we are looking at so called brems-strahlung or breaking radiation from electrons. When electrons are accelerated they fight that via sending out electro-magnetic radiation.
But, for example, in an antenna the electrons are accelerated back and forth and as such produce em-radiation. 

If the dogma of physics were true and electrons are in fact magnetic dipoles, in that case the back & forth acceleration would leave some kind of fingerprint due to the magnetic dipole nature of the electron. The reason is very simple:

Moving electrical monopoles like electrons generate magnetic fields and moving magnets generate electrical fields.
After all that is the idea behind the Maxwell equations... 

But if the electron were a magnetic dipole, one way or the other this would leave some kind of fingerprint because the north & south pole would show negative interference. Yet for all frequencies of the electro-magnetic spectrum this is never ever observed.  

So this reason number 28 is a good victory over the dogmatic professional physics professors.


This update has two parts, in part 1 I cover what I explained above.
In part 2 I show a very rudimentary way to put three linear polarized light waves into super-position in order to make a circular polarized light wave. Part 2 is far from perfect but from the beginning I tried to avoid using 3D complex numbers and after deleting an amazing lot of text I decided to stop this for a long long time. 

So part 2 is very imperfect, let it serve as some vague advertisement for the 3D complex numbers... 

This update is five pictures long in the usual format: 550 by 1100 pixels. Have fun reading it.










There is a wiki about brems-strahlung, it is a bit technical so it is more for the die-harts. 
The main problem with all those wiki things that are getting technical: they do not use the fact that electrons are also accelerated by magnetic fields. The idea that electrons only get accelerated by electrical fields is not correct in my view.

Anyway, here is the wiki: Brems-strahlung http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung

This is the end of the update number 28 as why electrons cannot be magnetic dipoles. Till updates. 


Update from 05 July 2016: 

What I forgot to mention in the above that if we work from the hypothesis that the electric charge of an accelerating electron creates the magnetic part of linear polarized light and the monopole magnetic charge makes the electrical field part, in that case there should be a severe problem for all long wavelengths. 

Again: If d is the distance between the magnetic poles of an electron, the longer the wave length is the more negative interference there will be and electro-magnetic radiation would all be 'handicapped' in the sense it would have almost no electrical field part while for all frequencies the magnetic field component would be equally strong. 

Yet in practice all em-radiation is born equal not depending on the frequency.
This is just another clue electrons have magnetic charge... 

Now I am also my own greatest critic: May be em-radiation is born unequal for different frequencies but that these differences soon fade out to make a perfect oscillating em-wave with equal amounts of energy in the magnetic & electric field... Who knows? But for the time being, all em-radiation is born equal!
Till updates.  


03 May 2016: Reason 29: Because Germans say neutrons carry magnetic moment

I found a nice article about some Germans from the Helmholtz-Zentrum Berlin für Materialien und Energie claimed back in 2009 to have found spin spaghetti with magnetic monopoles at the end. 

Please remark this is their claim and not mine because I think all spin half particles are magnetic monopoles. 

Here is the link to a page from that university:
Magnetic monopoles detected in a real magnet 

The reason I have chosen this detail is because there are so many physics professors that explain the electron magnetic behavior via stating it is an electrical charge that is spinning. That is one hundred percent bullshit like explained before, but what about the neutron??? 

A neutron has no electrical charge whatsoever, so how can that be a magnetic dipole anyway?
Or are we now getting a horrible complicated explanation that the quarks inside the neutron are spinning about 500 times the speed of light and that via a special spatial configuration this produces a magnetic dipole and that 'this must be true because of the Maxwell equations'? 

There is no limit on the amount of nonsense these university people will keep on producing while each and every one of those overpaid professionals could by a few of those new strong neodymium magnets and hold it next to one of those old televisions.
Much more proof that electrons are accelerated by magnetism is not needed one might argue. 

So not the university people. 


But let me quote what I found interesting from that Helmholtz-Zentrum page: 

During the neutron scattering measurements a magnetic field was applied to the crystal by the researchers. With this field they could influence the symmetry and orientation of the strings. Thereby it was possible to reduce the density of the string networks and promote the monopole dissociation. As a result, at temperatures from 0.6 to 2 Kelvin, the strings are visible and have magnetic monopoles at their ends. 

Comment: Like said before with neutrons you can have stuff like strings, small cubes of six neutrons or any kind of shape in 2D or 3D that has some checkerboard pattern in it. Electrons and protons can only form pairs because they have electric repulsion due to like electrical charges. 
And how did they
reduce the density of the string networks and promote the monopole dissociation?
Answer: Simply jack up the applied outside magnetic field and the string of neutrons will get longer. 

This is just like in the electron pair: An external applied magnetic field will drive the electrons further apart. (But we discussed that in the update on the explanation of diamagnetism, see above at entry from 27 Jan 2016). 

Ok no fancy pics this time but I have to say I had to laugh when I did read: The magnetic monopoles are at the end of the strings... Till updates.  


12 June 2016: Reason 30: New photo's from a television experiment. 

It is about time to post another reason in this page on magnetic stuff according to the insights of me myself & I: Reinko Venema. Not that the previous 29 reasons are not convincing enough but a few days ago I wondered what would happen if I cut my stack of six strong neodymium magnets into two stack of 3 each and put them closely together...

And the result is beautiful: 

1)You have electrons on the outside of the black lobe and those electrons are the 'rejected ones' that are pushed out by the neodymium magnets. 

2) You have those electrons on the inside that are attracted by the strong neodymium magnets &

3) You still have that dark spot on your old fashioned television screen where no electrons at all are landing... 


But there is also that thing known as the Lorentz force, the Lorentz force is studied deeply and widely and it is known it makes all electrons go spinning wildly in a direction perpendicular to the field lines of the applied magnetic field. 

As far as I understand the Lorentz force, it looks like the Lorentz force is causing the a-symmetry in the two photo's I show you here: It is very hard to get the center piece of attraction of the electrons to be horizontal...  

In the photo below you see I am trying to bring the center piece horizontal, but for that I need to lower the left hand magnet and to raise the right hand magnet.  


Anyway the most important thing to hammer down is the next:  

The 21-th Century science of physics cannot explain the dark spots on the television screen.

Why are there no electrons landing on the dark spot? 


Let's leave it with that, till updates. 


12 July 2016: Reason 31: Experimental results from JET show non confinement for plasma particles.

Another perfect title for this update would be: What is all that unexplained turbulence in magnetized plasma?  

This update reason number 31 is based on two Youtube video's;
one video is about a lecture in plasma physics that covers a lot of the math details while
the second video is a more global oversight of where we are after decades and decades of fusion failures.

Let me give you the two video's in advance so you can decide for yourself if you want to see them: 

7e Beyond classical transport in tokamak plasmas (about 44 minutes)

Miklos Porkolab | Worldwide Progress Nuclear Fusion Energy (about 66 minutes)

Let me start with the first video; I made four screen shots as shown in the image below.
In my computer file system this picture has the title:
Everything wrong with plasma understanding. 


These four small screen shots represent four faults in the way the professional physics plasma professors think about their trade: At all costs possible the Gauss law of magnetism must be worshipped. 

The tiny fact that electrons were discovered much much later is of course completely irrelevant because at all costs possible we cannot doubt Gauss and his law of magnetism... 

Ok, here are the four faults as observed in the above image:

Fault 1: In the upper screen shot you see helical electron or proton movement; this is correct and caused by the Lorentz force but the way this is drawn you observe no acceleration of the particle. That is the 'dogma part' of plasma physics.

Fault 2: A giant difference between theory and experiment; they try to understand how particles disperse to the outside (that is the D with the perp sign to it) and if you use dogma stating magnetic monopoles to not exist you get that very small number.
Experimental evidence shows it is much much more like in the order of one square meter per second.

To the excuse of the plasma professors this is info from the UK based JET tokamak and they also use electricity to keep the plasma together and electricity also accelerates plasma particles...  

Fault 3: Plasma does not diffuse properly, anyway not like Brownian motion. But if you need stuff like Lévy-flight to model your plasma, something must ensure the acceleration of those particles. Well magnetic acceleration proportional to the inverse of the mass explains all observed stuff properly.

Fault 4: If all spin half particles are magnetic monopoles, in all tokamak and stellarator designs both electrons and nuclei will more around in two directions. So you will always get four streams of particles. And when those stream collide always a lot of particles will hit the walls of the vessel. 


Ok the second video is about a guy summing up all failures of making some kind of eternal energy source for the world so that after that we can pollute the world on a far bigger scale with even more plastic pollution in nature because in some far distant future we will have 'free energy'.  

Here is the weirdo not understanding the magnetic monopole nature of electrons: 


And I would like to close this update with a very very simple calculation that might explain a lot of those plasma turbulences. It runs from the assumption that the less mass a spin half particle has the more it is influenced by a magnetic field. 

The 'calculation' is so simple it is not even worth that name but by lack of another word let's name it a calculation.
After all if electrons are really about 3 million times more accelerated by the magnetic fields compared to the protons and the neutrons and other nuclei, that must be an important source of all kinds of plasma instabilities... 



Ok, that was it for this reason number 31.
I have to say that slowly these reasons are more or less covering a lot of aspects from physics (and chemistry of course) but for acceptance of my insights it seems logical that first those wisecracks from for example the MIT institution need to fall flat on their face. Ha, these MIT weirdo's with their so called 'new superior design' for fusion reactors, all they did was jacking up the strength of the magnetic fields so it does not solve the problems at all... 

And what about Lockheed Martin? Two years back in 2014 all that bla bla bla of making nuclear fusion so small it would fit on the back of a truck for about 200 thousand households... All these weirdo's, all those shallow thinkers they first need to fall on their stupid faces I just guess... 

Till updates & thanks for your attention!  


11Aug2016: Reason 32: Why does the plasma start spinning asks Steve Cowley. 

Physics professional professor Steve Cowley is giving a lecture or an oversight upon nuclear fusion and at 41.20 minutes he asks the next perfect stuff about the plasma inside a torodial magnetic field: 

Why does it rotate?
Why does it rotate when we put no momentum in to spin the plasma? 

Source: Inside ITER: Preparing to burn (Steve Cowley)

Well Steve, the answer is pretty simple:
If electrons or ions are inside an electrical field they start moving and accelerating along the field lines of the electrical field because the electrical field puts a force on those particles. If plasma particles inside a torus start following the magnetic field lines, they too get accelerated but now by the magnetic field.
Hence electrons are not magnetic dipoles Mr. Steve Cowley...
The observed behavior of the plasma is in line with the fact that all spin half particles (except neutrino's) carry magnetic charge; it is not that hard to understand unless you are a professional physics professor. 

Here is a modified screen shot from professional physics professor Steve where he ponders as why the plasma is that evil it starts rotating while the Holy Prophets Maxwell and Gauss did forbid that in the 19-th century: 


Steve also talks about simulations of plasma on computers, I never mention this because all those simulations cannot be trusted as long as the magnetic forces are not correct woven into it.  

So all in all we now have two fundamental things as why nuclear fusion will fail bit time:
Thing 1) In the last update we calculated the gigantic acceleration undergone by electrons compared to protons,
Thing 2) The plasma breaks down into four groups and those groups do not rotate in the same direction: two electron groups are going against each other and so do the ion's simply modeled as loose protons. 

But due to the engineering of the ITER machine presently being build in France or the old JET in the UK, there is another fundamental problem that will lead to what I call 'magnetic discharge'.   

In nuclear fusion reactor 20-th century style the plasma has two magnetic fields for containment:
The most important magnetic field is ensuring the plasma goes round in circles and is the toridial field.
But a guy named Fermi discovered in the 1940-ties that this would lead to electronic separation in the plasma so in order to prevent that there is also a vertical magnetic field. 

And ha ha ha, since all spin half particles are magnetic monopoles this gives rise to photo's like the next: 


You see there is accumulation on the top and bottom and that will go on an on as the plasma is more and more seconds subjected to magnetic fields like this. In the end this will lead to magnetic discharges where the total magnetic charge of a collection of electrons has become too bit, it will discharge into the rest of the plasma...  

But thing number three can be repaired: Ensure the vertical magnetic field is oscillating in some low frequency will prevent the building up of large quantities of electron magnetic monopoles... 

Now that it will be done, the ITER project is just flushing 20 billion € down the drain while in the meantime fossil fuels will fuel more and more climatic change. And the professional physics professors, 10 or 20 years down the timeline they will still be wondering as why the plasma starts rotating... 

End of reason number 32 as why electrons are the long sought magnetic monopoles. Till updates. 


19 Aug 2016: Reason 33: Vertical displacement events in nuclear plasma's

This week I came across five video's in the French language from a guy named Jean-Pierre Petit. On my desktop computer I can only get it in French but on my television it is automatically translated and you can read the text on the bottom of the television screen. 

This Jean-Pierre is my hero of the day, if I were able to nominate somebody for the Nobel prize in physics it would be him because Jean-Pierre understands that electrons are accelerated by magnetic fields. 

He never speaks the words 'magnetic monopoles' because that would make all his 'professional plasma colleagues' vomit long and hard and would make Jean-Pierre a social pariah, but the drawing that Jean-Pierre made says enough: 


Jean-Pierre is painting here a picture of a particle that gets blown out of the sun while at the same time is traveling along the magnetic field lines. You can find the source of this screen shot in the next video at 7.23 min: 

ITER: Myths and truths 2/5 

Jean-Pierre is, just like me, a heavy criticaster of the design of nuclear fusion reactors. 
For example: Jean-Pierre understands that some of the electrons will be accelerated to relativistic speeds, that is in the range of 99% of the speed of light and above. 

Now why is Jean-Pierre speaking these evil words because those evil words make chopped meat of some of the finer details in the Maxwell equations & everybody knows that going against mainstream stuff like the Maxwell equations is basically the end of your career as a professional physics professor??? 

Very simple: In the video you can see Jean-Pierre is likely retired. 
So he does not have to worry if his next publication will get published or rejected...
As such he can say what he wants. 


The title of this update is about vertical displacement of plasma in fusion reactors and this can only be caused by the so called poloidal (stationary) magnetic field. Those tokamak fusion reactors have two magnetic fields:
-one that goes around the torus, the toroidal field and 
-a vertical magnetic field named the poloidal field. 

Anyway the stationaly magnetic fields causes a collection of magnetic monopole electrons at the top and bottom of the plasma vessel and every now and then we will see these things that I name 'magnetic discharges'.
And they can be very violent. 

Let me cut & paste the explanation of what a vertical displacement event actually is: 

VDE, Vertical Displacement Event

When the magnetic energy of the plasma becomes unstable and escapes to the vessel, for example during a disruption, then a large amount of current can pass around the vessel (see halo current). The magnetic field of this current can interact with the poloidal magnetic field of the central solenoid, resulting in an upward force on the vessel – these can amount to many tonnes, and can move the entire vessel many millimetres. 

Source of the above quote: https://www.euro-fusion.org/glossary/vde-vertical-displacement-event/#  

Comment: Since when is there 'magnetic energy' in the plasma? Isn't the official dogma utterly clear: The Gauss law for magnetism says there are no magnetic monopoles. And if there are no magnetic monopoles more of that official dogma says that magnetic fields only interact with elementary particles via the Lorentz force that makes the particles go round and round perpendicular on the direction of the magnetic field... 


At the end of this update I have to admit I am very glad that at least there is an observation of one plasma professor that says elementary particles could get accelerated by magnetic fields. Of course when tomorrow the other plasma professors wake up they will do what they have done for the last 150 years: 

Worship the Maxwell equations for another day. 

We end with another screen shot from the Euro fusion website, it is just the quoted text from above: 


End of this update on reason number 33 as why it is completely impossible that electrons are magnetic dipoles. 

Till updates.  


13 Sept 2016: Reason 34: Two famous physics professors telling nonsense.

The goal of this update is to show that simply naming the magnetic properties of the electron 'spin' drives otherwise sane people into a 'cognitive bonkers state'. The tiny fault of Gauss who never ever observed only one electron in his life has multiplied over the decades into the nonsense that the next two more or less famous physics professors believer in: 

Bonkers physics professor number 1: 

David Awschalom who is the leader of a large spintronics research facility & 

Bonkers physics professor number 2: 

Leonard Susskind working at Stanford university. 

Here are the faces of the two people that do not understand the basics of the famous Stern Gerlach experiment: 


The label 'spin' for the magnetic properties of for example an electron has caused a lot of brain damage in people who would keep on being mentally sane without those weird words 'electron spin'. The brain of the imbecile known as David Awschalom is clearly poisoned at lot by the label 'spin'.

This professional professor compares electron spin to the spinning of the earth and as such neglects that tiny problem:  

Electrons are far to small to create such magnetic havoc, even if all electric charge was concentrated on the equator of that very electron it needed to spin that very equator over 100 times the speed of light. 

I have never done such calculations because I work from the hypothesis that electrons carry electric charge but also magnetic charge. Ok ok it is not impossible those electrons are also spinning, but all in all those spinning effects can only contribute at most 1% of it's magnetic properties. 

The imbecile David Awschalom goes expressing his belief into electrons being magnetic dipoles in the next video of this retard, check it out at about 3 minutes into the video (as usual click on the picture) where he states that this magnetic dipole can point to anywhere on the surface of a sphere... 


Source file of the picture: Spintroncis made easy
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPIbGq634yU 

Pointing in any possible direction David?
Didn't the famous Stern-Gerlach experiment from the year 1922 say that this just DID NOT HAPPEN? 

On the contrary; the stream of silver ions did split into two parts in an inhomogeneous magnetic field and the sole fact one of the streams went into the direction of the weaker part of the magnetic field CANNOT BE EXPLAINED BY ELECTRONS BEING MAGNETIC MONOPOLES...  

Now silver has atomic number 47 and has 61 neutrons so 47 + 61 = 108 nuclear particles.
The electron is about 1800 times less mass than on nuclear particle so the amazing observation is: 

How can one unpaired electron pull about 1800 times 108 = 194400 times it's own mass into the direction of the weaker magnetic field? Only the monopole nature (it's magnetic charge) of the electron can explain this my dear David.

Before we turn to Leonard Susskind who in my house is infamous by stating:
"For some kind of reason nature does not allow us for knowing the electron spin in the x and y-axis direction", 
(It was assumed a vertical magnetic field was applied in the direction of the z-axis.),
please read quick this next link:

Stern-Gerlach experiment (from 1922) 

Here is an schematic picture from this wiki of what Leonard Susskind does not understand about repeated Stern-Gerlach experiments on a row: 


So repeated S-G measurements into the vertical z-axis direction give repetition but if you change the direction of the applied inhomogeneous magnetic field all of a sudden one beam of already vertical measured electrons splits up again into two beams...  

The down to the ground answer to that is very simple: The applied magnetic field transfers enough energy to the electrons so the can flip magnetic monopole state. Don't forget when an electron flips from the high energy state to the lower, this is the famous 21 cm wavelength so that astronomers can study galactic and inter-galactic atomic hydrogen. 

Therefore I, Reinko Venema, claim that: 

If energy transfer by the magnetic fields is below the energy associated with the 21-cm wavelength, in that case z+ electrons will stay z+ electrons. 


Ok, now to Leonard Susskind and his view on magnetic monopoles.
Today I found a short video where he explains that magnetic monopoles, if they exist, have a gigantic magnetic field around them. About 10 thousand times as strong as the electrical field of the electrons he claims. 

Stuff like that goes back to Paul Dirac with his infinitely long magnetic dipole string and because the length is infinite in practice you would get magnetic monopoles... 

It all looks like a weird pipe dream because electrons carrying a small monopole magnetic charge is much more reasonable in my view. 

Anyway here is the Leonard Susskind short video: 


This is more or less the end of this update on reason 34 with the nonsense talking professional professors in physics, it is of importance to observe we have a two split in physics people: 

Theoretical bla bla people and so called experimental physicist (the screwdriver type).  

So I would like to repost a photo of my own experiment with an old television of 6 € and a stack of those new Neodymium very strong magnets. It is the Reinko Version of the Stern-Gerlach experiment and once more it shows the magnetic monopole nature of electrons because only repelling & attraction can explain the black circle where no electrons land on the screen: 


Now should we pity these two professors who are leading figures in their field?
Come on these non-performers carry at least 10 grand a month into their bank account, if you compare that to my money income there is extremely little reason to have pity on two more overpaid non performers. 

In the next update in reason number 35 we are diving into the math of nuclear fusion safety stuff.
So see you around! 


17Sept2016: Reason 35: Some tokamak explosive discharges explained.

I found a very readable article on the preprint archive about the explosive disruptions that nuclear fusion plasma's can have and the article says 'it is a field of active research' to understand these explosive disruptions and displacements. 

Let me first give you the title and link to the preprint archive: 

Role of explosive instabilities in high-β disruptions in tokamaks.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.01083.pdf  and https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.01083

To be honest I do not know exactly what a 'high beta' disruption actually is but as the months go by more and more it becomes clear that using stationary magnetic fields always leads to trouble when it comes to confining plasma's for nuclear fusion. 

Let me quote the opening words of the very readable preprint article, quote: 

Tokamak plasmas operate within imperfectly-defined operational boundaries.
Accidental or deliberate crossing of these boundaries generally leads to a sudden loss
of confinement: the thermal energy content of the plasma is lost on sub-millisecond
time scales (thermal quench), followed by a somewhat slower (ms time scale) loss of
poloidal magnetic energy (current quench) (see, for example, Wesson[1], Sect. 7.7, for a
basic discussion, and Hender[2] for more recent developments). The energy lost from the
plasma invariably ends up on plasma facing components such as the first wall or divertor
tiles. This sudden energy flux, and the forces generated on the surrounding structures
by currents that directly couple to them or are inductively induced during the current
quench, pose a significant threat to the structural integrity of the device[3, 4]. Hence,
understanding disruptions, and their prevention or mitigation continue to be very active
research areas in magnetic fusion. 

Comment: In my view where electrons and protons carry a small magnetic monopole charge, the magnetic fields also transfer energy to the plasma. For example the vertical poloidal magnetic field makes particles of opposite magnetic charge moving to the upper and lower parts of the torus. After enough accumulation of, for example, north pole charged electrons in one place they suddenly discharge. It discharges for two reasons: electric repulsion and magnetic repulsion.  

Here you see a schematic picture of how such a tokamak (a Russian invention by the way) is supposed to operate: 


You see there is all kinds of magnetic action going on to keep the very hot plasma inside the vessel and please please not touch the walls: 

1) The toroidal magnetic field goes round and is the strongest magnetic field.
2) There is plasma current that drives the plasma towards the central circle of the torus.
3) In order to avoid vertical drift of plasma particles they need additional poloidal magnetic fields. 

Let me avoid being too technical as why we would have particle drift like that: It goes back to a guy named Fermi that understood you would get particle drift in ways you would not want it... 

Now an important observation is the next:

Do you see the electrical current in the inner poloidal coils?
It goes against the direction of the internal plasma current that is used in tokamak stuff. 

Likely the engineers found out 'this is more stable' compared to a situation where both currents contribute to a more massive vertical magnetic field. If you would run these two electrical currents in the same direction, the two vertical magnetic fields would combine and separate the fusion much much more leading to much more vertical displacement discharges... 


It is as simple as it is: 

1) Plasma particles only follow magnetic field lines because they have a net magnetic charge.
2) If plasma particles would not have a net magnetic charge, they would only do Lorentz circles and never discharge.
3) Perpendicular on those Lorentz circles plasma particles have Newtonian acceleration, yet the plasma professors have no clue what so ever... 


Let me finish this small update with a beautiful but overly simplified mathematical formula: 

The B stuff is the strength of circular and vertical magnetic fields while the R and the a refer to the two circles that define a torus. As you see: A too strong vertical magnetic field Bp gives a safety edge factor that is too low.
But if electrons were magnetic dipoles, the Bp would not drive them together and no safety factor was breached in the first place...  


Ok end of this update, see ya around! 


03 Oct 2016: Reason 36: Solar corona temperature explained via the bonkers force. 

For a long time it is well known that the atmosphere of our sun is much hotter compared to the outer layer of the actual sun. The outer sphere (the photosphere) of the sun is about 5800 degrees Kelvin while the corona has raging temperatures of one to three million degrees.

Present day standard physics theory says that electrons and ions can only be accelerated by electrical fields and not by magnetic fields because even the electrons are magnetic dipoles. Any fool can see that if indeed it is true that electrons are magnetic dipoles, a magnetic field cannot accelerate this electron because the forces upon it cancel out:

The force of the magnetic field on the north pole of the electron cancels out against the force of the magnetic field on the south pole of the electron. So what explains the high temperature of the solar atmosphere, the solar corona?  

Present day standard physics theory says electrons go round  magnetic field lines because of the so called Lorentz force. And indeed they do; and if by going round they will smash into other particles and as such raising the temperature of the plasma they are in. 

Tiny problem: The Lorentz force that is making the electrically charged particles going round in circles has a much higher probability to smash another particle in the parts of the sun where there is high density of particles.
In the solar corona this is not the case: it is more like a gas or an atmosphere. 

That leaves only the bonkers force as the main contributor to the high solar corona temperature: the bonkers force is the acceleration that magnetically charged particles feel from a magnetic field.
Therefore the bonkers force is always along the magnetic field lines and particles that carry the same electrical charge will go in two directions: acceleration or de-acceleration. 

An important detail is the fact that the particles in the solar corona are mostly without collision, that is what gives the bonkers force the freedom to accelerate these particles to high speeds.   

Here is a NASA picture of how solar plasma behaves under the influence of magnetic fields:  


If you look at pictures like this and you realize how strong it is correlated to magnetism, it is very hard to defend the Gauss law for magnetism. It is impossible that electrical fields are the root cause of plasma behavior like this. 

And at the same time, magnetic fields cannot accelerate small magnetic dipoles because the forces would cancel out... 

Hence: electrons, protons and helium kernels cannot be magnetic dipoles. 

End of reason number 36. 


05 Oct 2016: Reason 37: Old and new experiments upon the bonkers force.

The bonkers force is the force electrons (and protons and neutrons) feel when they are in a magnetic field and it is in the direction of the magnetic field lines. It is not the Lorentz force because the Lorentz force is perpendicular to both the velocity of the particle and the direction of the magnetic field. 

Why the name 'bonkers force'?

Very simple: If more and more experimental results are in, this force will make the professional physics professors go bonkers... ;)  

The most simple experiment can be done at home with an old television, once more here is a photo where I hold two small stacks of neodymium magnets against the tube of an old television I bought for six €: 


We observe three regions:

1) The outer region, the border of the outer region with the black region are the repelled electrons.
2) The black region where no electrons land, the Lorentz force cannot explain this detail &
3) The extra bright region where the electrons land that are attracted to the magnets. 

Why does this show electrons carry magnetic charge and are not magnetic dipoles? 

That is because the electrons are traveling towards the neodymium magnets, so the magnetic field lines have more or less the same direction as the path the electrons take. This minimizes the possible effect the Lorentz force can have because mathematically the Lorentz force is an outer product and the outer product of a vector with itself is always zero. 

Furthermore we observe a discontinuity here while the Lorentz force, although stronger than the bonkers force, behaves in a continuous manner. Yet we observe discontinuous behavior of the electrons... 

In the next picture you see an explanation of the Lorentz force.
It comes from a screen shot where the sixty symbols folks explain the Hall effect, we do not need the Hall effect here but you see with your own eyes that there is no observable separation in the green curve of electrons. 

The reason I show you this picture is that on a very small scale this is the kind of experimental setup for measuring how strong the bonkers force is on an individual electron given a particular magnetic field strength. 


Ok, the above picture might be interesting but on a wikipedia about the Lorentz force you can find the next beautiful photo that gives a very strong clue as how to make better measurements of the bonkers force.
Click on the picture to get the original as found on wikipedia: 


As you see on inspection: The beam of electrons gets broader in the direction of the magnetic field but it turns not into a torus shaped thing or so. This simply means the electrons are accelerated along the magnetic field lines: So we are observing the bonkers force in this beautiful photo. 

The photo was found at: Lorentz force, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force 

In the photo you see rather likely a wide anode, in most cyclotrons or Lorentz force demonstrators the anode (that is the positive thing the electrons fly to) is just a small thing and you do not observe the bonkers force. 
This observation brings us to a possible future experiment: 

In an apparatus like the above, replace the anode by a fork with 3 points.
Jack up the magnetic field and try to make the stream of electrons go into two streams with (almost) nothing landing on the middle fork tip. 

That is a very simple experiment that I cannot perform here in my house. 


Before we go to the main proposal of measuring the bonkers force per unit of magnetism, let's say the force on an electron per Tesla, I would like to show you these two pictures: 


On the left you see are more or less standard version of the apparatus known as the Lorentz force demonstrator.
But on the right it is suddenly possible to make it spiral away while at the same time those very people worship the Maxwell equations that say electrons cannot be accelerated by magnetic fields... 

Source of these two pictures: 



Ok, the main proposal for measuring the bonkers force per unit of magnetism for electrons goes more or less like this: 

1) Two coils, radius at least 0.5 meter, for making a nice homogenous magnetic field. 
2) These two coils should be separated in space something like the radius. Anyway the field should be homogenous.
3) This setup looks like a cylinder, halfway between the two coils the electron cannon should be placed.
4) The electron cannon fires the electrons perpendicular on the homogenous magnetic field.
5) There is a cathode firing the electrons but there is no anode for sucking the electron up.
6) The experimental setup should be in a space with no other electric or magnetic fields in it.
7) The electrons must be in a vacuum so there is no interference with other matter.
8) At some fixed distance from the electron cannon electron detectors must be there in both directions.
9) Use the Newton law for acceleration, that is x = at^2 to measure acceleration along the cylindrical axis. 
10) Use Newton force law F = ma for calculating the force per capita magnetic field strength. 

The beam should split in two spirals like in the picture above. 
One of the details that should confirm we are actually talking about magnetic charge: 

The force on the electrons and acceleration of the electrons must be proportional to the strength of the magnetic field. 


Ok, this is the end of reason number 37 as why electrons cannot be magnetic dipoles.  

See you around in reason number 38 that is about the solar wind: One of the completely not understood features of the solar wind is that it is accelerating all of the time. Present scientific knowledge says this can only be done by electrical fields...

So till updates my dear reader. 


10 Oct 2016: Reason 38: The Hendrik Casimir effect and the vacuum catastrophe.

Yes yes I know that just a few days back I said the next reason is about the solar wind and why it accelerates (against gravitation of the sun and also electrical considerations) but a few days back I learned that you can actually win Nobel prizes with only studying electrons in thin layer structures. 

Therefore I just thought: Why not give that Nobel prize committee a slam explaining the root causes of that what is known as the 'vacuum catastrophe'? 

Now what is the vacuum catastrophe? 

According to professional physics professors the Hendrik Casimir effect gives rise to a very high energy content of the stuff our universe is mostly made of: space. Or vacuum if you want, you know space without matter in it is called a vacuum. 

In my view there is a simple way to understand as why the Casimir effect does not measure what was the goal but gets hindered by the pesky fact that electrons are magnetic monopoles. 

Never heard of the Casimir effect? 

In a nutshell it goes like this: 

Vacuum or not, under the detection of the Heisenberg principle virtual particles can live for a very short time on borrowed energy. These virtual particles have to abide to the standard laws of physics, for example if there is spontaneous formation of an electron this should be accompanied by a positron.   

Now given the Heisenberg principles the more massive these particles are, the more unlikely it is that it will happen in the first place and also the shorter live those virtual particle pairs have.  

Back to the experiment of the Casimir effect: This experiment has a fundamental flaw in it: 

The people doing this experiment tried all and everything to avoid external forces to spoil the experiment but they did not take into account that electrons are magnetic monopoles. 

Let me first give you two links to read if you have limited knowledge about the Casimir effect, the first is in Dutch because Hendrik Casimir was a Dutch guy: 


In the English language we have: 

Casimir effect

Ok, now what is the main flaw in this experimental setup? 

Very simple: If you use metal plates, because it is a metal in it's macroscopic structure like being a plate it has lots of free electrons. By definition loose electrons are magnetic monopoles, only the electron pair is magnetic neutral. 

Now if you bring two metal plates together, more and more the electrons will go into a checkerboard layer while the opposite layer of metal sheet will show a dual version of this checkerboard layer:

Every south pole magnetic monopole electron on the one metal sheet will have a dual north pole electron on the other metal sheet... 

And these two layers of electrons as they are found as very thin layers on the outside of the metal sheets is what mostly drives the attraction between the two sheets of metal. 


So in about 50 minutes I explain to you two more thin layers of electron behavior that also explains the vacuum catastrophe...  

And although Nobel prize inspired: No Nobel prize for me, it is better if idiots keep on running the place...

Here is a simplified picture of how this Casimir effect is supposed to work using virtual particles: 


Let's leave it whit that: The entire Nobel prize copied in just 50 minutes using thin layers of electrons in a Casimir effect setting explaining the source root of the energy content of vacuum space...

Who says you need university people?

Till updates. Updated 09 Oct with a video from Veritasium talking about the vacuum catastrophe (it is named that way because this is the most wrong theoretical prediction in science). 

Here is the video, it is 8.42 minutes long:  The Best and Worst Prediction in Science

At about 6 minutes and 40 seconds you see the vacuum catastrophe in numbers:
It is only about 10 to the power 120 off the mark. 

To be honest I do not know how much the results of the Casimir effect play into this gigantic discrepancy yet the Casimir effect was a honest design to measure the pressure in vacuum. So the wrong setup of the Casimir effect experiment that did not take into account the fact that electrons are magnetic monopoles might be the main beef in this discrepancy. 

Here are two screen shots from the video, this is the energy in one cubic centimeter of space.
On top you see the real value as physics professors think now, on the bottom the theoretical prediction: 


I had no idea what the hell is an erg???
It seems to be an old fashion thing of energy outside the SI system, 1 erg = 100 nano Joules. 


Yet at the end of this update it is best to once more think about the way a two dimensional sheet of electrons would form in case these are free electrons inside a metal foil. If you bring two foil very close, what will happen?

Rather likely both thin layers of free electrons will form a checker board pattern and in the other foil the thin layer of electrons will go for a dual version so there will be an intrinsic magnetic attraction between the two metal foils...

For the time being, this is the end of reason 38 as why electrons cannot be magnetic dipoles.  


14 Oct 2016: Reason 39: The acceleration of the solar wind.

The strangest property of the solar wind is that it keeps on accelerating until about nine times the radius of the sun.
At present date a force like gravity is not able to do this; gravity should make all particles decelerate, not accelerate.
Now suppose the sun is a giant positive charge (meaning on average there is a shortage on electrons0, in that case the ejected electrons should decelerate while the ejected protons and larger nuclei should accelerate.  

In case the sun would have a negative charge all in all, the electrons should accelerate and the protons would loose speed. 

One thing is clear: Present day physics cannot explain as why the solar wind accelerates all of the time. 

Recall that in the above old reasons about nuclear fusion on earth, the electron temperature was always much much higher compared to the proton temperature. I explained that via the fact that electrons get much much more accelerated by the magnetic fields as used to contain the fusion plasma inside the reactor vessel. 

For the solar wind this is not the case, at first I was puzzled by this but now I have taken the time and think about it a little longer I am understanding more about the underlying dynamics. So we will start with a very easy thought experiment but before that I would like to show you a table as found in the Encyclopedia of Astronomy and Astrophysics (by R. Schwenn).
A so called AU is an astronomical unit or the average distance from the sun to the earth: 


For solar particles flowing out, as I understand it now, there are three forces at work: 

1) Gravity,
2) Electrical fields &
3) The bonkers force that accelerates particles along magnetic field lines. 

Before we proceed let us first conduct the simple thought experiment: 

Leave out the role of gravity and the bonkers force; 
Let, for simplicity, the solar wind only consist of electrons and protons;
Suppose you have two buttons on your desk. One button makes the electron stream stop, the other protons;
Suppose we make the electron stream stop and we wait for a long long time to see what will happen. 

Now, what will happen? 

If only protons fly out, more and more the sun will become negatively charged.
It might take a long time but eventually the stream of protons will become less and less because these protons will be more and more attracted by the giant negative charge of the sun.
In the end the solar wind will die... 

End of the simple thought experiment. 


Ok let us proceed with the solar wind details from the table above: 

You see there are two kinds of solar wind, a slow and a fast one.
Due to gravity only, a particle would need about 617.5 km/s to escape the sun (wiki source

A bit vague is the lower line about the sources of the two kinds of solar wind, but the streamer belt is a region around the equator where most of the sun spots are found while the things named 'coronal holes' are more in the north and south pole of the sun. 

As a matter of fact, a nice wiki under the name Solar Wind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind). 

Let me quote the most significant part that the fast part of the solar wind is coming from the north and south pole of the sun: 

Components and speed

The solar wind is divided into two components, respectively termed the slow solar wind and the fast solar wind. The slow solar wind has a velocity of about 400 km/s, a temperature of 1.4–1.6×106 K and a composition that is a close match to the corona. By contrast, the fast solar wind has a typical velocity of 750 km/s, a temperature of 8×105 K and it nearly matches the composition of the Sun's photosphere.[24] The slow solar wind is twice as dense and more variable in intensity than the fast solar wind. The slow wind also has a more complex structure, with turbulent regions and large-scale structures.[20][25]

The slow solar wind appears to originate from a region around the Sun's equatorial belt that is known as the "streamer belt". Coronal streamers extend outward from this region, carrying plasma from the interior along closed magnetic loops.[26][27] Observations of the Sun between 1996 and 2001 showed that emission of the slow solar wind occurred between latitudes of 30–35° around the equator during the solar minimum (the period of lowest solar activity), then expanded toward the poles as the minimum waned. By the time of the solar maximum, the poles were also emitting a slow solar wind.[28]

The fast solar wind is thought to originate from coronal holes, which are funnel-like regions of open field lines in the Sun's magnetic field.[29] Such open lines are particularly prevalent around the Sun's magnetic poles. The plasma source is small magnetic fields created by convection cells in the solar atmosphere. These fields confine the plasma and transport it into the narrow necks of the coronal funnels, which are located only 20,000 kilometers above the photosphere. The plasma is released into the funnel when these magnetic field lines reconnect.[30] 

Comment: Please neglect the numbers between rectangular brackets like [30] because these are internal wiki references. You see the bonkers force is at work at the magnetic poles of the sun and since the stuff gets ejected into outer space it is rather obvious that these particles are rejected by the sun's magnetic field.
Furthermore we see stuff coming out, like the fast solar wind, but that is only half of the story told by the sun: The other half should go in because that half is attracted by the solar magnetic field. 


When it comes to solar wind there are plenty of books out there.
A simple search on Google books gave me this screen shot from a few days back. Sorry I forgot to write down the source but it is about the speed of electrons (a few days back I did not understand why the electrons were going that slow compared to human plasma events inside fusion plasma vessels). But as the solar wind goes out the temperature gets lower because by definition temperature is the interaction between particles and the further it gets away from the sun the less interaction there is of course... Here is the screen shot and in the yellow marks you see what I searched for on Google Books: 


I do not recall what book this came from, but there are a whole lot of books out there about the solar wind.
Yet non of those books could explain the temperature properly because non of these writers of those books take the acceleration of the solar wind into account.
Of course when it comes to the out-streaming solar wind: the magnetic north pole of the sun repels the north pole electrons and protons, the same goes for the magnetic south pole when it comes from ejecting/repelling south charged particles. 


A detail that baffles the mind is the fact that from down to earth plasma in nuclear fusion reactors it is known that the electrons have a much greater speed compared to the protons. But for the solar wind this is not the case.
So how come?  

Only after thinking about this, after a few days I understood we are not looking at some fusion reactor where most of the temperature of electrons and protons is caused by the artificial magnetic fields needed for containment of the plasma. No, if you look at the sun you observe something that has evolved for billions of years.  

So if it is true that magnetic forces make electrons accelerate far more compared to protons, it just has to be that in the beginning of the formation of our solar system this excess of electrons was blown out of the sun. As such the remaining electrons are much more tamed and bounded to the sun.  

If this is true, the sun has a positive electrical charge or a shortage of electrons. 
This electrical field causes protons to accelerate and electrons to decelerate.  

But the magnetic field of the sun ensures everything is accelerated away from the sun and that is more or less how the solar wind differs from nuclear plasma as found inside our fusion reactors... 

The solar wind is also the product of a dynamical environment, what we observe now is the result of a solar evolution of over 4 billion years. And this solar wind is a fine equilibrium between the three forces: 

Gravitational force field, electrical force fields and magnetic force fields. 


At the end of this update with reason number 39 I only would like to post a picture of the magnetic field around a sun spot. Electrons are coming out following the magnetic field lines and it looks beautiful:


For myself speaking it is great to understand a bit more about that horrible difficult thing to understand: the sun.
The solar wind is a dynamical balance between the three main forces, gravity, electrical fields or Coulomb forces and magnetic fields or the bonkers forces.

End of reason number 39 as why electrons cannot be magnetic dipoles. See ya around!  


27 Oct 2016: Reason 40: Electrons must conserve linear momentum, but they don't. 

This webpage is now one year old, precisely one year ago on 27 Oct 2015 I published the first ten reasons as why electrons cannot be magnetic dipoles. At that point in time I never thought I would find 30 more reasons but at the same time it has to be remarked that there is all kinds of overlap between the diverse reasons.
I am not trying to find some smallest basis of independent things but more like finding as much as possible that points towards electros being magnetic monopoles. Of course in the meantime I also keep on looking for stuff that validates electrons are magnetic dipoles but beside physics professors who say stuff like that in practice it is unfindable.  

This reason number 40 has a lot of overlap with all kinds of other reasons; mainly the fact that if electrons had two magnetic poles because the electrons are so very small the two magnetic poles would be so close together that any applied magnetic field would have zero effect on the electrons. All forces on the north pole side of the electrons would cancel out against the force on the magnetic south pole of these very electrons. 

In this update I would like to view from one of the fundamental laws of physics: 
Conservation of linear momentum. 

For example electrons coming from the sun towards planet earth are changing direction. But if the Lorentz force would be the only force acting upon them, the electron would simply conserve it's linear momentum while making weird spiral movements perpendicular on the resulting magnetic field and it's own velocity. 

In practice did does not happen; if electrons would conserve their linear momentum the Aurora Borealis and it's Australian version would not be localized at the magnetic North and South poles of the earth. It should be anywhere. 

And all these 40 reasons long my main point in reasoning has always been: The electrons follow magnetic field lines because they are attracted or repelled by the magnetic field, homogenous or not, and that can only be the case if electrons are magnetic monopoles. Or, if it turns out they are not pure magnetic monopoles, have at the very least a net magnetic charge. 

Don't forget: electrons can actually spin but even with all electrical charge on the equator of the electron the effects from that spinning are minimal.  

So that was our reason number 40 where we only look at stuff from a known principle: conservation of linear momentum. 


After having this page for one year by coincidence I found a nice picture on Google picture search: 

Only once or twice a year I check what kind of pictures you get when you do a Google picture search on my own name Reinko Venema. And the result was suddenly very good, here is a screen shot from the result: 


In the upper part of the above picture you see what you get when picture searching for three dimensional complex numbers and on the bottom of the picture you see a photo I made with that television for 6 € and a stack of those new strong neodymium magnets. As you see on inspection; the electrons landing on the television screen right before the stack of magnets is clearly attracted by the magnetic field. 

After that there is that dark ring shaped thing where no electrons land and outside that is the rest of electrons, those close by must be the electrons that are repelled by the magnetic field and on a larger distance are electrons that are too far away to be influenced significantly by the stack of permanent magnets.  

Till updates. 


24 Dec 2016: Reason 41: The vacuum catastrophe part 2.

In short the vacuum catastrophe goes like this: 

It is by far the biggest fault in theoretical physics when it comes of measuring the amount of energy that is stored inside vacuum. It is wrong by a order of magnitude of 120, sometimes they say it is only 107. 

So how much energy is actually stored in vacuum space where I define a vacuum as some volume without any particle that carries mass in it. The amount of energy depends highly in what environment this space is, for example things contributing to 'how much energy is inside this box of vacuum space' could be: 

1) Strong gravitational fields in the neighborhood, or
2) Strong magnetic fields in the neighborhood, or 
3) Huge amounts of photons flying through this particular part of space.  

It is clear those outside things are only transporting energy and have nothing to do with how much energy is stored in vacuum space when it is without those outside sources of energy flowing through it.


We humans will never know how much energy it takes to make just one cubic meter of space, after all we cannot shrink one cubic meter to zero and see how much energy this will release...

And the other way around: Any amount of energy at our fingertips will never create a tiny bit of extra space. 

But when talking about the vacuum catastrophe it is not how much energy is needed to create one extra unit of space, it is about what we can expect on average as how much energy is found in it. Idea's about that are often based on the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.


The Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that for small quantum particles you cannot measure both position and speed at the same time because the act of measuring the place influences the speed and measuring the speed makes the actual place of the particle more unsure.  

This is directly related to getting information from the quantum scale to the macroscopic scale we humans live in.
When trying to measure a small quantum property we need to fly in giant amounts of energy that destroy or change all other quantum properties of that particle.

So it is easy to see there is a conflict between our macroscopic brains and that what is actually going on at the quantum level: the very act of measurement is like throwing a nuclear weapon in, for example, Arkansas in order to measure the average height of the grasses that grow over there... After we throw the nuclear weapon we cannot measure the average height of the trees, the houses or stuff like that.  

Now professional physics professors claim that this Heisenberg thing is not only a measurement problem from the macroscopic world going into the quantum realm, no no no it is an 'intrinsic thing' of quantum mechanics and as such it can be applied to every thing like the vacuum of space. 

It goes like this: 

Now it is an intrinsic quantum thing, it is also possible that pairs of particles pop in and out of existence for short periods of time. But these pairs of particles cannot violate the Heisenberg uncertainty principle so they can borrow tiny bits of energy for only a very short time. That is why we name these kind of particles 'virtual particles'.  

It is important to notice that no pair of virtual particles have ever been observed, for example we have all these data flowing from CERN where they collide all those protons day in day out but also at CERN never ever only one pair of virtual particles have been found... 

It is well known in popular culture we have those physics professors claiming that in the vacuum of space we constantly have all those virtual particles popping in and out of existence.  

In practice we still have to find experimental proof for the very first pair of virtual particles... 


The Casimir effect. 

Over half a century ago a Dutch guy named Hendrik Casimir conducted a famous experiment where he tried to measure the influence of the virtual particles as allowed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. 
In theory the experimental setup was easy to understand yet in practice hard to do:
Bring two very thin conducting metal plates very close and try to measure how they will attract each other.  

The Casimir idea goes back to stuff like the 'particle in a box' kind of one dimensional solutions to the Schrödinger wave equation, here is a picture of the theoretical reasoning behind it: 


Back in the time this was a very hard experiment to do: how to bring two so called 'Casimir plates' perfectly parallel together with a distance in the order of one micrometer (a micrometer is one thousands of one millimeter and as such is one millionth of a meter). 

Why use metal conducting plates? The tiniest accumulation of electrical charge would spoil the whole experiment, so these two plates should be connected to earth as to remove all electrical charges.  

The two plates should also be thin in order to avoid gravitational forces spoiling the measurement. 

Back in 10 Oct last month when I was crafting my '50 minutes at most' response to the Nobel prize as it was awarded in the science of physics I had no clue whatsoever how important the Hendrik Casimir effect measurement would be on the so called vacuum catastrophe: It was a gamble but it paid out the good way because for example we have this 21 year old file: 

http://ticc.mines.edu/csm/wiki/images/7/72/VacuumCatastrophe.pdf  The title of this undergraduate lecture is:

Vacuum catastrophe: An elementary exposition of the cosmological constant problem. 

Anyway to make a long story short, on the fourth page the monkey comes climbing out of the sleeve:
Experimental evidence was found by the Hendrik Casimir effect. Here is a small screen shot of the fourth page: 


I know this stuff looks a bit weird but they use units that for example say the speed of light c = 1.
So a lot of stuff is missing but you see that thing d^4. 
Now d is the distance between the two plates and when this distance is about one micro meter the amazing result is that on that distance scale the plates attract by the order of d to a mighty large power of 4...   

Here is a picture without those constants like h bar and c slammed to 1: 


This picture is from the next video (at 4 min 10 seconds, the entire video is 64 minutes):  

Casimir Effects - Peter Milonni

If the distance d between the plates is about one millionth of a meter (a micro meter) every square centimeter gives about -0.013 dyne/cm2. This amounts to about the force of an electron bound in the hydrogen atom (the dyne is likely an old energy unit from outside the standardized SI system). 


You can easily write a book about this stuff known as the vacuum catastrophe, but let me close this update with only concentrating upon the experimental evidence of the Hendrik Casimir effect: 

Every time I say 'checkerboard pattern' but I do not expect all kinds of nice squares to emerge in the one Casimir plate and the dual to be observed in the other Casimir plate. Let me show you a kindergarten drawing of a closed curve that many times crosses itself. 

An important mathematical feature of such a closed curve is that it divides the plane into two parts:
One with mostly spin up (denoted by u) and a part with electrons having net spin down totals (denoted by d): 


The final pattern itself is totally irrelevant, the only thing that matters is that in the other Casimir plate the u and d are replaced by d and u. That is what I mean with dual electronic layers. 


I think it is best we stop this update here because once more the vacuum catastrophe is about 10 to the power 120 off the mark and luckily the vacuum of space feels like a vacuum. 
In practice there just isn't 10^120 more mass in it related to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. 

Yet as a closing remark I would like to say that this vacuum catastrophe is very similar to the ultra-violet catastrophe that was dealt with by a guy named Max Planck. It is similar in the sense you have to neglect the high frequencies, in the case of the black body radiation as studied by Mr. Planck it was found out that heat forced electrons in higher energy orbits and those electrons give only light when they fall back into lower orbitals. 
For the vacuum catastrophe it is much harder to place the finger on the weak spot; as I view it today (24 Dec 2014) all these Heisenberg restrained creation of virtual particles might be much much more constrained because for example there is no real mass in the vacuum... That is to say the Heisenberg uncertainty principle only works for stuff that has mass.

End of this update.