Windevoid
-
Posts
202 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Windevoid
-
-
On these sites:
http://phy214uhart.wikispaces.com/Ma...ue+To+Currents
and
http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2000fa.../solenoid.html
It says that a magnetic field (force) only depends on turns, "length", and a few variables that aren't explained at all.
It is not (volts times amps)/distance or (volts times amps)/(speed times time).
Now, since energy is force multiplied by distance (times cosine theta), this would be the source of the over unity.-1 -
On these sites:
http://phy214uhart.wikispaces.com/Ma...ue+To+Currents
and
http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2000fa.../solenoid.html
It says that a magnetic field (force) only depends on turns, "length", and a few variables that aren't explained at all.
It is not (volts times amps)/distance or (volts times amps)/(speed times time).
Now, since energy is force multiplied by distance (times cosine theta), this would be the source of the over unity.-2 -
There's also the problem of posing a scenario that isn't physically possible. If you violate the laws of physics, you can't rely on the laws of physics to tell you what happens.
I suppose you are talking about entropy and the arrow of time.
0 -
That's the point of the self-consistency principle: You cannot make changes to the past - you simply become part of the narrative resulting in the same outcome.
You turn the ship, and it rams into another part of the iceberg. You stop the ship, and the iceberg rams the ship. Or you inadvertently distract the crew running around shouting "Beware the iceberg" and they ram the berg because they were too busy dealing with you.
You can read more at Novikov Self-Consistency Principle
Perhaps the universe can change instead of this determinism that you are talking about.
And if you read any of my other posts, the universe seems to have paradoxes already.
0 -
This reminds me of the Novikov self-consistency principle; one cannot create time travel paradoxes.
As an example, you could not go back in time and stop the Titanic from sinking, even if you warned the Captain. More than that, you were always part of the history of the Titanic sinking and did warn the Captain at the time, but did not prevent the sinking. You may have even have coursed the sinking!
I'm not totally sure that is true.
You see, if you go back in time and push the iceberg away or stop and/or turn the ship before it is too late, you would prevent the sinking.
0 -
If "time" went back then forward again, would everything turn out the same?
It may be a philosophical question or a quantum or classical one, but I just decided to put it here.
0 -
A vacuum is an insulator, and is infinitely less dense than copper. That would be because density is not a characteristic of a conductor vs insulator.
As Mellinia has noted, the characteristic you need is free electrons. Air becomes a conductor once you achieve breakdown voltage, where you can ionize molecules which give you — ta daa! — free electrons.
Makes sense.
1 -
Those are not paradoxes.
Those are not paradoxes.
Why are they not paradoxes? Maybe that is another paradox.
0 -
There are trainloads of paradoxes. You don't notice them because there are so many and they are so fundamental.
How can a bird chirp when I can't see it?
Why can't I use magic on a whim?
Stuff like that.
0 -
And how does/would air act as an insulator when it is 7314 times less dense than copper?
And air is not a solid or a structured solid like concrete and plastic and ice.
Air is voluminous. The "electrons" of the normal theory would go between the air or through the air like x-rays and radiation from "radioactive" substances.
0 -
Because you need a closed circuit. The battery works by a reaction taking place at both electrodes. This can only happen if they are part of the same electric circuit.
I'm not so sure those chemicals would even react on their own.
I don't think you are in any position to say something like that as you appear to have no understanding of theory.
Current will only flow when there is a complete circuit from one terminal of the battery to the other.
That would be like saying water can only flow when it lands on the other end of the bottle it came from, which isn't true.
0 -
I don't think you are in any position to say something like that as you appear to have no understanding of theory.
Current will only flow when there is a complete circuit from one terminal of the battery to the other.
Why can't it flow between two batteries, then?
1 -
But when you put the positive end of one battery to the negative end of another battery, nothing happens. Not until a complete circuit is made. According to normal theory, there should be lots of amps, not a flat zero.
0 -
You need to do a better job of explaining your thought process, because this makes no sense. What are you looking for, when you ask if anyone has "seen the electricity in a circuit". Have you ever seen water flow in a pipe of a closed system? You know it's there because of how it behaves.
Why on earth would the "atomic area" turn grey or black? How would you check the inside of a wire, anyway?
Most straws I've ever used (especially restaurant ones) are clear plastic. You can see the water or pop inside them.
-5 -
If they are electrons, why has no one ever seen the electricity in a circuit? Have they not looked?
Certainly the atomic area under electricity would become grey or black, right?
-3 -
Is "dross" just another word for "I'm not looking at the claim, get it away from me." because that's not science.
0 -
Yeah, and when you discussed it with us here on the forum, we showed several of the elementary mistakes you made.
This is why I included the phrase "Be prepared to present a great deal of evidence to support this extraordinary claim."
You, Windevoid, failed to present almost any evidence, if the amount you've presented to this forum is any indication of what you did in your paper.
The data was here:
Although it now seems the capacitor may have been a thermistor.
0 -
If you have truly done this, then write a journal article explaining what law of physics all the rest of us have gotten wrong all the rest of these years, and submit that article to Science. Once it is published in such a reputable journal, you will receive a great deal of attention and funding.
Be prepared to present a great deal of evidence to support this extraordinary claim. The laws of physics as we know them today are supported by a tremendous amount of evidence -- that's how they became laws. That's why there is tremendous skepticism in your claims here; skepticism I share BTW.
If you have truly done this, then write a journal article explaining what law of physics all the rest of us have gotten wrong all the rest of these years, and submit that article to Science. Once it is published in such a reputable journal, you will receive a great deal of attention and funding.
Be prepared to present a great deal of evidence to support this extraordinary claim. The laws of physics as we know them today are supported by a tremendous amount of evidence -- that's how they became laws. That's why there is tremendous skepticism in your claims here; skepticism I share BTW.
I did that once. They threw it out before peer review.
0 -
The device may need a pulley or gear system to make the generator spin faster, and the generator coil may need to be smaller then the motor coils.
0 -
You know that I can not explain the design until I have it registered officially or filled for a patent.
although I had a patent for another project which needed several years to be issued .
I am not asking a help to improve but whom to contact who may be interested like research center or else.
Well good luck. No one accepted, and perhaps no one even believed, much at all when I told them about my design publicly on the internet. (I'm still not sure mine definitely would work, but my research heavily suggests it would).
0 -
And why? What would cause this?
If charges "leaked", then there would be a charge imbalance, which would attract the "leaking" charges. That force gets strong pretty quickly.
And why? What would cause this?
If charges "leaked", then there would be a charge imbalance, which would attract the "leaking" charges. That force gets strong pretty quickly.
If something like that happened, then there wouldn't be electric circuits at all. The "electrons" would never be able to get out of the battery.
0 -
!
Moderator Note
In keeping with the rules, you need to explain your device, and how you have shown it's over-unity/perpetual. No explanation, or evidence, and there is no thread.
I don't think frzmaw is claiming over-unity.
0 -
Sorry, I had to say continuous motion because it does not produce motion from nothing but converting energy from one shape to another and I am working to reduce the cost, please give me suggestions to my question to support me and I will remember any help
So then, is it a perpetual motion machine, or just another type of electric motor or heat engine?
0 -
I found:
Pyramid? Lone Mansion? in Saudi Arabia:
17°28'40.97"N 45°10'2.23"E
Strange Lines in Yemen:
18°10'20.26"N 50° 6'1.11"E
18° 8'24.67"N 50°12'25.20"E
18°19'21.88"N 50° 8'16.94"E
18° 7'0.10"N 50° 1'55.18"E
18° 7'50.49"N 50°11'38.37"E
Square Line in Yemen?
18° 6'3.94"N 50° 3'2.20"E
0
I think philosophy is scary.
in General Philosophy
Posted
What do you think about this?
Mostly consciousness, causation/noncausation, the beginning/ending of the universe, the idea that we as humans might overlook a new science or deny it until a thousand or so years from now, an apparent lack of sense in the universe, apparent lack of magic powers, and other such things.