Just as a little addition:

Reichenbach discovered, that even not so sensitive people can see these red and blue emanations, if the air is evacuated (vacuum).
E.g. many people who couldn't see the emanations from a magnet in the dark, could see it, if the magnet was placed under a desiccator which was evacuated. As long as it was evacuated, they could see these shining lights, but as soon as air was again let in it disappeared (surely only for the not so sensitives, as the higher sensitives could easily see it in normal pressure conditions).

BTW: Wilhelm Reich discovered the same. Namely that he could see these Orgone emanations especially good in vacuum tubes.

And also Viktor Schauberger discovered the same:
Here a quotation from his autobiographical text "Die Entdeckung der Levitationskraft":



Rough translation from me:
[...]Sure, I responded. For this one has just to let a water drop fall with air resistance or without it, to get constructive or disintegrative energies, which are of meta-physical, which means not physically perceptible, character. Because, I continued explaining, constructive (levitative) energy guided in a vacuum tube gives a blue/green, and disintegrative (gravitative) energy, a bloodred strong pulsating light, which appears at the inner periphery.[...]

You see, all speak of exactly the same thing...

BTW: If some people are interested, I could share much more of such examples and discoveries, of all these people. Where you can really see, that they all had exactly the same cosmogony as Dr. Maybe just some puny differences in some details, but nothing that matters.
But I will certainly only do it, if people are interested...

For those who are further interested:
These are the people who IMHO surely knew what they did (as they all were able to develop devices on their cosmogony which showed that current physics is so on the wrong way) and they all had the same cosmogony -> Dr.'s cosmogony. They just focused their work on different aspects of the cosmogony:

Viktor Schauberger (focused mainly on the nature aspect, and especially water)
Karl Schappeller (focused mainly on the basic primary motion/and potential difference aspect)
John Ernst Worrell Keely(focused mainly on the vibratory/oscillatory aspect)
Wilhelm Reich (focused mainly on the human aspect. And later also on the weather aspect)

I in no way mean, that these are the only ones, but these are the ones I more or less intensively studied over time.
I think the difference between these people and many others, which at some time made a machine which violated the current physics paradigma, is, that they knew what they did. They built their devices on this cosmogony and did not get it out of accidental trials...Therefore they also could replicate it again, which is exactly what many people who discovered some effects were not able to, for they didn't knew why their devices were working...

Wish you all the best, peace and happiness for all of us.

I am very interested in what you have to share.


And likewise to you as well.

In continuation of this theme, I present the following ideas about magnets as well:

(pg. 179, Atomic Suicide?) *Emphasis added by me.

The work of Howard Johnson allows us to actually see these vortical flows that the Russell's spoke of and knew about through inner sensing. In his book, The Secret World of Magnets, he presents the data that he and his team collected when they took a computer and had it map out the area around a magnet in great detail. This is what they saw:

[ATTACH]92[/ATTACH]

There are several important characteristics depicted here which have relevance to the Russell's work:
+The tightly compacted vortices are rotating clockwise, and the more tenuous vortices are rotating counter-clockwise.
+Each pole of the magnet is a mirror of the other.
+The vortices come in pairs, making 4 in total.
...These patterns show up again and again. :detective:

The seeming "attraction" and "repulsion" we usually attribute to a thing we call "magnetism" only shows up with the motion of electricity. (Think of how electromagnets function.) I believe this is absolutely imperative to understand to fully comprehend what is being referred to, not only in the above quoted paragraph, but in nearly all of the Russell's work.

Thank you for reading.

(pg.18, A New Concept of the Universe)

I believe this is meant both literally and figuratively.

In a figurative sense, I present a silly (but no less important) example for your enjoyment: Men and women seem to be "opposites". But that opposition is only seeming, for as we know, it takes both a man and a woman to create human life. Indeed, they are not opposites, but perfect complements! This is just one example of how complementary they are.

So when are men and women opposites? When what they do as individuals is in opposition...an angry man and a happy woman certainly don't get along, and vice versa.

It is interesting to note, that opposition is expressed in the action of things...what they do, rather than what they might seem to be. "Like attracts like." The circumstances we manifest are a reflection of the choices we have made.

For some examples of the literal sense, I quote the following:

Taken from Universities Asleep At The Switch by Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.
(If you would like, you can read it here: Universities asleep at the switch)

The gear analogy given is actually quite elegant, and probably explains where the confusion arose. I made some images to explain:

[ATTACH]93[/ATTACH]

In this image, the two gears seem to be going in opposite directions. From our point of view, the one on the left is turning clockwise and the one on the right, counter-clockwise. However, if you notice the teeth of the gears, they blend perfectly. The gears can function because they are mirrors of one another.

[ATTACH]95[/ATTACH]

In this image, the two gears seem to be going in the same direction. From our point of view, they are both turning counter-clockwise. But, they don't move anywhere because the teeth are grinding against each other. They literally oppose.

The same can be understood with magnets. Keeping in Mind what I wrote in my previous post, if you were to "see" the electricity running through a magnet it would generally look like as if it were going in one way and out the other. If you were to take two magnets, and align them so that they push each other apart, you would know that they do this because the electricity running through them is pushing them away from each other.

Now, if you take them and make them face each other in a way where they come together, you would know that the electricity flowing through them pushes them together from the outside. (This is important, as it applies to more than just magnets and explains why any "attraction" is only seeming.)

Thank you for reading. Hopefully this may be of constructive use to you all.