In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Sun, 3 Jun 2018 18:03:12 +0100:
Hi,
If had to guess, I'd say a major in physics, and a minor in sociology. Is this
for a sociology paper to see how gullible we are?
[snip]
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
local asymmetry = temporary success
Vibrator, there are a number of claims involving violation of CoM and CoE,
and it involves an asymmetry in the rate a acceleration/deceleration.
I wonder if that fits your description.
Also sometimes this seems to include a influence or energy field exiting
the mass.
Is this maybe the case?
On
LOL the quote you're referring to is expressly a calculation of the energy
efficiency of a hypothetical fully-asymmetric distribution of momentum, ie.
an effective N3 symmetry break, in the context of Bessler's 'toys page'.
The purpose is to illustrate the decoupling of input to output energies as
LOL have i not just clearly delineated the terms of their equivalence?
Allow me to put it more tangibly:
- Apply a 9.81 N force vertically between two 1 kg masses, the moment both
are dropped into freefall.
- We observe a kind of inverted 'slinky drop' effect - the upper mass
hovers
@John
Your view of what is conserved and why is too simple, and essentially
incomplete.
All force interactions perform work against the vacuum activity manifesting
that force - the discrete, quantised energy exchanges between the
respective force carriers in question, traded in units of h-bar -
No EM energy asymmetry alone can even speak to the issue of CoM - apples to
oranges. CoM is not energy-dependent - it doesn't matter how much energy
we throw at it, nor its provenance.
The time-dependent variable you propose here is just a causality violation
- photons by definition propagate at
If this thing is real, give up trying to get fame or fortune out of it.
Just mail copies of how to build it to various people who are likely to put it
together – before you get mysteriously stopped somehow.
Destroying the elite is a worthy goal of a lifetime.
If the prototype works, let’s see a You Tube. Or at least some good drawings.
eek 'touch wood'. Jinx.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Vibrator ! wrote:
> Agreed. A great equaliser. Burst bubbles all round. Brexit for everyone!
>
> As for fame or fortune, not interested in the former but i currently live
> on about 8K so a pot to piss in would be nice. Still, that's
Agreed. A great equaliser. Burst bubbles all round. Brexit for everyone!
As for fame or fortune, not interested in the former but i currently live
on about 8K so a pot to piss in would be nice. Still, that's no reason to
bury it like Bessler did. And we all benefit from the results, so long
On 5/06/2018 2:40 AM, Vibrator ! wrote:
Your view of what is conserved and why is too simple, and essentially
incomplete.
All force interactions perform work against the vacuum activity manifesting
that force - the discrete, quantised energy exchanges between the respective
force carriers in
On 5/06/2018 12:30 AM, John Berry wrote:
John, there might be the odd exception.
I can give you an example that seems to break the CoM and CoE, it isn't
practical. Now there might be an explanation, MAYBE it produces a photos that
explains the propulsive effects... But I doubt it.
Now, the
On 5/06/2018 4:32 AM, Vibrator ! wrote:
LOL have i not just clearly delineated the terms of their equivalence?
Allow me to put it more tangibly:
- Apply a 9.81 N force vertically between two 1 kg masses, the moment both are
dropped into freefall.
- We observe a kind of inverted 'slinky drop'
*On 5/06/2018 12:30 AM, John Berry wrote:John, there might be the odd
exception.I can give you an example that seems to break the CoM and CoE, it
isn't practical. Now there might be an explanation, MAYBE it produces a
photos that explains the propulsive effects... But I doubt it.Now, the
easiest
Actually, I have another one...
Take a large loop apply a current, we see that each side of the loop
experiences a pushing outwards.
Now, we remove one side, from the loop and replace it with capacitor plates.
No we energize a current through our broken loop and each side feels a
force pushing
@Chris
You're kind of on the right track, if not quite for the right reasons yet,
but yes, i've concluded i ought to make a full disclosure within a few days.
I'd wanted to 'do the right thing' and minimise the chances of causing
harm, also giving UK academia first dibs. No one's taken the bait
On 4/06/2018 11:19 PM, Vibrator ! wrote:
. . .
The only precondition there is that we can apply a force between two inertias,
which nonetheless only accelerates one of them.
This I suggest is your problem. If you apply a force between two masses or
inertias, then one must accelerate in the
John, there might be the odd exception.
I can give you an example that seems to break the CoM and CoE, it isn't
practical. Now there might be an explanation, MAYBE it produces a photos
that explains the propulsive effects... But I doubt it.
Now, the easiest way to explain (though there is a
@ John
"No" to any inference of mysterious energy fields permeating the masses,
but "absolutely" to the interplays and respective dimensions of
'acceleration'.
Consider a 1 kg weight, connected by a pulley cord to another mass that
slides horizontally without friction. You may verify that the
@Mixent - Like i say, i'm insulting everyone's intelligence just by making
the claim.
If someone thinks they have OU, they're almost by definition wrong.
They've made some crass mistake, or they're just plain delusional.
Attention-seeking BS artists are rarer, but still common compared to
genuine
So give us good pictures already. Enough with the verbiage.
I increasingly believe in the negative power of stigmergy rather than
conspiracy. People just blindly follow each other like termites and build
ideas as truth. “Everybody knows” that centrifugal force is just a pseudo-
force,
On 1/06/2018 5:35 AM, Vibrator ! wrote:
. . .
The thing is, a real model is inherently suspect - defeating its ostensible
purpose. Batteries and motors can be hidden, etc.
If you make it out of clear perspex with the minimum steel parts like bearings,
springs, etc then there is nowhere to
On 5/06/2018 12:37 AM, Vibrator ! wrote:
Consider a 1 kg weight, connected by a pulley cord to another mass that slides
horizontally without friction. You may verify that the rate of change of net
system momentum is a constant, invariant of the ratio of gravitating to
non-gravitating mass -
23 matches
Mail list logo
