At 10:08 am 05-07-04 +0100, you wrote: >Sorry about the capitalisation later on... > >Bill Beatty wrote to Mark G ><<Your wonderful contribution in creating and maintaining vortex, suggests >the >opinions you express here are a rare lack of good judgement>> > >Hi Mark, > People like Bill and Jed retain their scepticism for a very >good reason. They have had experience, or have knowledge, of how literally >hundreds of "free energy" type schemes have worked out. They are >particularly wise to be sceptical about magnetic motors or exotic induction >schemes as these seem to attract the outright fraudsters, the dreamers and >the deluded, to claim success or, more importantly to claim to be on the >verge of success AND KEEP ON CLAIMING THIS INDEFINITELY whilst trying to >attract development capital or licence fees. When you express ideas like the >quoted section above, I am sure many of us start to get a sinking feeling. >We have seen it all before! > > It is surprising that you give credence to the claims of the Brady >motor because it so closely resembles other failed schemes of the past. They >seem to use as their theory that it is possible to "tap the energy of >magnets". They seem to misunderstand what magnetism does. A magnet has an >area around it which will attract a magnetic material or attract or repel >another magnet. The energy that is converted here is POTENTIAL ENERGY.
>It is functionally equivalent to the energy contained in a compressed or extended >spring. The spring is compressed or extended because WORK has been done upon >it to compress or extend it. This takes ENERGY from somewhere else to do it. >There can be no free lunches using springs. Similarly with magnets. > <snip> >Nick Palmer Little as I relish the prospect in this instance, I feel I must in fairness act as devil's advocate and plead the case for the defence. Is the energy manifest by a the sails of a Crookes' Radiometer as they flow/flux around the central axis, POTENTIAL ENERGY? Now magnetic flux/flow can be viewed as the manifestation of a source and a sink at the bottom of a very deep ocean, since, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then one would be unwise to dismiss the possibility that it might actually be a duck. 8-) Therefore, the notion that the magnetic field arises from the equivalent of quasi-Crookes turbines driven by some component of ZPE motion is not IMHO entirely out of the question. It seems to me there are two kinds of people who might possibly develop a "free" energy device using magnets. People who are so naive and ignorant of scientific dogma that like the King With No Clothes child, they recognise magnetic flux for what it really is, And people who have not had grooves cut so deeply into their brains by "education" that they are incapable of climbing out of them. Cheers Frank Grimer Oh, and whilst I'm on the subject, the same kind of argument can be applied to gravitational potential energy as well. 8-)
