Author Options:

Why "Vortex" for Vortex math and devices? Answered

If you are new to the topic then it might give you a slightly quicker understanding than watching hours of youtube videos.

I assume you have seen these various coils that make a sphere shaped magnet spin at insane speeds.
They are a good start.
You see by normal understanding these Rodin or Vortex coils should not be able to produce a field that rotates that fast.
As with a lot of things we tried to use math to explain it in theory and than adjusted the math to match it.
Vortex math was born.
So how do you explain blue and red to a blind person that never saw anything?
I mean in a way they actually know how it would look if they could see?
Doesn't work, but we can use a Dyson vacuum cleaner ;)
A lot of "tornados" add up to one giant super tornado.
Spinning so fast that "all" the dirst stays behind and only clean air comes out.
As in nature all the weather cells add up to one that is more powerful than the combined single ones.

The tornados that form the term vortex are around the coils.
But also around the entire donut as well as every single strand of wire.
In any good vortex the rotational speed increases towards the center and bottom of the vortex.
You can try that with some floating stuff when you drain your bathtub or sink.
Try to imagine and endless tornado that runs around every wire like a spiral.
The coil itself adds another spin vector to it and increases the moving speed or the single tornado.
Combined it adds up to a very strong tornadoe moving very fast around in the coil pack.
As this also creates a rotating field like another tornado in the donut shape it all gets twisted up.
Physics as we know it won't fully explain these effects.

Vortex devices that produce electricity are usually coils in a special winding configuration and pattern.
Like we try to eliminate certain things with basket coils in the HF area a Rodin or Vortex coil tries to utlise these otherwise unwanted stray effects and interferences.
Overunity is another term people like to use here but I leave it up to you if such a things is phsically possible with an electrical system.

Vortex math tries to explain all these things demonstrated in experiments.
However I found two slight flaws in the common approch.
1. Only two dimension used.
Unlike the coils the simplified Vortex math only operates in two dimensions.
A circle instead of a sphere if you like.
2. Again, unlike the coil harmony and resonance are neglected.
It seems in some cases people try to draw a circle just with straight lines.
While in reality you have a never ending, resonant "stream" in three or to be precise four dimensions.

Is it the chicken and egg problem?
Yes and no.
You can only calculate something if you can fully understand it or exactly replicate it in reality.
Vortex coils are just way to interpret theories and get some sort of results.
And those results are the real problem.
We can measure magnatic fields in strenght and direction even frequency.
However we can neither make them visible in real time not measure mixed or entangled fields properly.
We "see" Mars is our "red planet" but in reality it just the atmosphere, the surface is not red at all in most places.
NASA has enough problems to calculated missions to outer space with enough accuracy.
Just imagine they would have to do it while considering that around every path our planets make is another spinning "distraction"....
That is exactly what Vortex math tries to do while eliminating common math bit by bit.
You can see and hear in 3 dimensions.
Maybe you are also good in drawing something in 3D on your compterscreen or 3D headset.
But how many here could predict the path of a baseball in 3D like they do when watching a game?
Depending on your viewing angle you might be way off....
Try to know or calculate where exactly the ball is at any given monet in time and how fast it spins in which direction.....
Our brains are not trained to think like this!
Even if we construct things like a dome we prefer to have straight features.
Sure manufacturing is one thing that needs to be affordable.
But try to just calculate the support structure if all is actually fully round like a sphere should be.
We avoid what is considered higher dimensions as much we can.
To calculate a distance in 3D it still seems easier to use two 2D models to add up instead of true vectors.
Again only through technology like computer we are able to simulate, understand and actually calculate what we need.
Where we ventured around the globe and into our solar system our math was left behind.
Finding workaround and good enough approximations still seems the way to go.
Instead actually evolving our math to our needs we just add more and more complex formulas and calculations.

To fully understand vortex math you need to let go and start thinking in 4 dimensions instead of just 2.
Oh, sorry, you might be new to this...
Number 4 is time of course.


The forums are retiring in 2021 and are now closed for new topics and comments.