yahya515

this site is a place for a punch of crazy people think that they get pleasure by talking about a story of a photon going and coming back , crazy people, how do get pleasure by talking about things that are invisible ? we get pleasure by our senses!! regarding my thread energy producer, I successfully generated energy from nothing, what do you feel about that basic physics is wrong? you get pleasure from something invisible and wrong this place is exactly a Sanatorium.

swansont , imatafal , hyper _valent idione , klaynos , I WOULD LIKE TO BE BANNED.

There hasn't been since someone pointed out the problem with this variation on the idea

The Taisnierus Magnetic Engine

http://www.kilty.com/pmotion.htm

The Taisnierus Magnetic Engine has nothing to do with what I am talking about

There's a clear problem with your concept and it has been pointed out to you.

It can not work. It produces no energy.

It is a breach of the laws of physics.

that means you just can't analyze it

There's a clear problem with your concept and it has been pointed out to you.

 

let me summarize that , there are two people , one claimed that there must be a noticeable horizontal resistance and he was convinced that there is not , another one suggested that there must be loss due to gravity , and he was convinced that there is not, everything is clear here , Cuthber.

I need more people to discuss , any one have a problem with my concept ?

 

I will reply to this in your 'Energy producer' thread to not derail this thread.

are you convinced now ?

 

OK, now I see. So you have a frictionless surface suspended on springs. You're initial drawing didn't have this one. Did you change your design?

 

So now it makes sense - you'll just need a frictionless material, probably brought from the other universe or simply not consisting of atoms or molecules and you're golden. Best of luck with that!

that is not a design , it is just a demonstration for the concept.

I do not need it to be completely frictionless , just at level to obtain more work from small one .

 

are you convinced now ?

yahya, please take a piece of paper and then draw the following. To move your plate horizontally you need to apply a total acceleration pointing towards your target location, right? Now, draw g vector pointing down. And now draw another acceleration vector such that the sum of this a and g vectors will give you a net vector a_t pointing in the direction towards your target location. Do you see now that the vector a will have to point upwards making an angle with the horizontal line and so the force you need to apply to provide this acceleration will have to be bigger than just to move horizontally as you claim?

 

That's your gravitational losses. Every time you move the plate sideways you'll need to provide an extra boost to account for gravity. And you won't get this energy back.

look at the picture above , in the previous post of mine , the acceleration of gravity g will cancel , if the surface is frictionless I may need small force to just push it along to continue motion by itself , the force may be neglected if the mass of the iron is small .

are you convinced now ?

 

1) Does the metal plate spontaneously materialize just above the magnet? Or do you get in there somehow before the initial step A?

2) When moving plate from A to B you still lose energy to gravity. Gravity doesn't go anywhere, it still pulls your plate down, right?

3) Both pictures for C and D are incomprehensible in a sense that it's impossible to figure out how the objects are located in relation to each other

4) Forget about magnetic field, most your energy losses will be due to gravity

1) I first put it there , but that will not be a loss in energy it is just a starter.

2) I suppose that there is a frictionless support for the metal to move above it horizontally,it may not be fully frictionless , but friction will be less than the normal force , which is due to gravity and magnetic force. I can add frictions forces to the input , the output will still be more , however imagining that the support surface is frictionless , gravity will not affect my horizontal push.

3) they are just above each other they have equal surface area , the metal is for example 3 cm above the magnet and away from it horizontally about for example 5 cm in position C , in position D the vertical distance is the same , but horizontal distance from the edges of both the magnet and the iron is zero .

4) there will not be loss due to gravity , only friction force .

look at this picture :

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah116/Yahya_Sharif/nnmmm_zps5kui200j.png

 

OK, what is the initial position of metal plate?

there is not an initial position it is a circle , after position D you return again to position A and so on.

Replying to comment by Yahya made in the other thread

 

 

OK, what is the initial position of metal plate? (Before step A). There are two options:

 

a) Lying on the desk by the side of the magnet, then:

 

When you lift it up and perform work against gravity, yes, you convert your work into potential energy of the plate (assuming a very efficient lifting mechanism), but then as you move it sideways to hover over the magnet, you still have to apply force to move it and to counter gravitational pull (and also the attraction by the magnet). This energy loss will not be converted into potential energy as the height doesn't change, and so will be an energy lost.

 

b) Lying on top of magnet:

 

Here you'll need to apply force to counter both gravitational pull and the pull of the magnet. And while lifting against gravity is 'refundable' in the form of increasing of potential energy, the magnetic field rapidly decreases with distance and so most energy used to separate plate from magnet will be lost.

 

This is just the first step and you're already losing energy, hence the efficiency of the system is far below 100% and you can't generate energy from nothing.

I do work twice , first change it from position A to position B , moving it horizontally , without horizontal resistance . also another horizontal motion from position C to D .

second changing it from position B to C , doing little work, because the magnetic force will be less, the critical point is , the magnetic force at position C will be less than it in position D , right? if so then the input work is much less than the output work.

for the output work it will be in changing from position D to A again , so the output work is much more the input work.

I mean I lifted it with small force to counter small magnetic force from stage B to stage C, and it came back with huge magnetic force from stage D to stage A again, the horizontal work can be neglected .

 

absolutely forgetting that lifting metal plate to the initial position and moving it from one point to another in a gravitational field will require work to be done and energy to be expended.

I will gain the energy I used as kinetic energy in lifting it up against gravity again by letting it be free in position D " see my picture " , as potential energy, I will have magnetic energy plus potential energy , in position C I loose it as kinetic energy , in position D I gain it as potential energy, so I am not loosing energy.

It does work.

how chemical reactions will take part in brain , heart , hormones activity in a dead person ?

I know that matter and energy are interchangeable (one can be converted into the other) but can matter and energy come from nothing?

 

Yes , it can come from nothing , refer to my thread , the energy producer , in speculations , it is an invention by which I generate energy from nothing.

Sorry, but I see no invention made by you.

 

How are you going to extract energy?

 

I have patented a device which will benefit from this produced energy , it is more complicated than this ,I want to check the concept of producing energy first .

Are you aware that you're turning iron to magnet by placing close it to permanent magnet?

I can solve that , every invention has its problem which can be solved , I ask again , will there be a noticable horizontal resistance using a weak magnet ?

if there is not a noticable horizontal resistane then my invention works, and I can generate huge work by doing little work , which is in other words generating energy from nothing!!

the magnet in the video is very strong , if you want to use it in my invention , fine, the iron will undergo the resistance I saw in the video , however , the magnetic force will be huge huge using a strong magnet, return to the my invention , I ask, using weak magnet will that give a noticable horizontal resistance ? in comparison with the vertical magnetic force ?

I am not using copper, I am using iron with a weak magnet , the force due electricity will not be a big effect in my invention. compared with magnetic force I gain ,is there a horizontal magnetic force?

 

Your assumptions are wrong.

 

Do you have metal pipe and magnet? Reproduce this experiment:

 

I am confused , the copper should not be attracted to a magnet.

I think I have been misunderstood while explaining my idea to generate work from nothing , I will try again :

 

I have here four positions , position A , B , C ,and D , in position A the piece of iron is above and the magnet is below, they are close to each other horizontally and vertically , at this position the magnetic force is huge , the co-area between the iron and the magnet is large , we take away the iron , to be in position B by moving it horizontally , without undergoing any resistance because it is a horizontal motion , there is not force horizontally, it is a vertical force between the magnet and the iron, so we move the iron horizontally to be in position B in position B we let go the iron, to be away horizontally by moving it but close vertically , while the co-area between the iron and the magnet decreases a lot there will be a huge decrease in the magnetic force , we will be able to lift it away from the magnet with little force to be in position C , in which it became away both horizontally and vertically , we return it again by moving it to be in postion D away vertically but close horizontally .in position D we let go of the iron to move with huge force to be again in position A , we repeat that to produce energy . I change the magnetic force from very small number to a bigger number , using this trick , and using very little work , the change in magnetic force will produce huge work .

The total number of the input work done is much less than the total number of the output work done , by this process we generate work from nothing .

 

3D picture for the four positions:

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah116/Yahya_Sharif/moooo_zpsqolrlahz.jpg

Stop proselytising and stick to the thread topic.

OK, was Jesus a real person ? yes he was.

Science answers the questions that make sense to ask, like how a mountain exists. As far as answering why a mountain exsits, sure science has nothing to say, but perhaps the question doesn't make sense and there isn't anything meaningful to say.

how a mountain exists ?!! ..........what causes life ? is it spirit ? if so , what is an spirit ? I think this is a more meaningful question than" how a mountain exist ?!! we care more about life than the mountain , so will science answer this question ? if not , then you are just ignoring the phenomenon of life , and that what I am talking about , see my previous posts .

 

Fear of the unknown is still probably a common theme of humanity, the unknown has receded thanks to science but death remains perhaps one of humanities biggest fears, and thus religion remains in our modern cultures.

 

fear of the unknown ? are you serious ? people fear of the bad things that may happen to them, that science can't avoid , these are well known , which causes pain and loss , that are what people are fear of and they still happen today.

 

Sure, what people were/are ignorant of has changed tremendously over time, people for the most part no longer need a god for different meterological phenomenom today thanks to science.

 

you are ignoring the most important thing which is life itself, the thing which causes life , and its absence causes death.

 

It is just chemistry. No "magic undetectable spirit" needed.

why chemistry does not work while a person is dead?

I think you are off on a tangent. I am not suggesting God does or does not exist. I am saying faith is a very blunt tool for establishing the matter either way.

 

what is faith ? I qoute from merriam webster " belief in the existence of God : strong religious feelings or beliefs " when you try to convince me not to have faith or faith is bad, it means you are trying to convince me that believing in the existence of God is bad and useless , according to the definition above of faith , and only if God does not exist that will be useful , that what I am talking about .

 

What makes people believe in myths? Ignorance, fear, and a biological proclivity toward false positive errors in pattern recognition.

 

do you thing they changed during time from the time of Jesus until now ( the things in bold) ? and what changed them ? did science do that ? and how ?

 

Science is what allows us to accurately determine from an objective perspective what is true

not true , science will not give you the ability to determine everything ( the word in bold) , people just ignore things that science can't determine !!

First you said it was like a magnetic field but can't say how it can be measured.

where did I say it is like magnetic field?! refer to my posts

Now you say it is like mass, but can't say how it can be weighed.

I did not say that ! it seems you do not understand my comparison between both mass and fields as being things that exist and spirit as also being something exist , the topic was if it exist or not and what is the evidence.

So, how do we detect it?

the absence of energy in a dead person, energy for talking , speaking , heart pulse , brain activity

all that work with energy, the absence of this energy caused by the absence of spirit.

imagine that I have a computer or a motor , the device will not work in the absence of energy , electric energy

when I supply it with energy it will work, however if there is something wrong with the computer it will

not work even if I supply it with energy, in computer we have software hardware and energy , it is the same

in a human body, the energy is contained in food, hardware is the organs of the body , the software is a bit tricky

if we have food (energy) and all the organs are good ( it means it can work like the heart taken from a person

being put in another person will work ) however the body is not defined by our software to work using food

even if everything is OK , but the body is not defined to work using food , the missing is the spirit, which is

similar to software .

how to define the body to work using energy from food?

only God can do that .

 

So what is the mass of this spirit? How would I weight it?

first are you convinced that it exists ?

 

And when asked for some evidence, you said the spirit was like the magnetic field. So, how do we measure it?

 

If we can't measure it, how do we know it exists?

if you have m and M two masses , m=2 kg , M = 100 kg , do you say M exists more than m ? or just they both exist , having a number which is not zero of a mass is enough to say about it that it exists , right?