Let's say from a falling weight, if that's ok with you. Michel
----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using *standard* physics > Michel Jullian wrote: > > Never mind, let's assume you're right. How can you > draw energy more than once from > this, or from a falling weight? > > > From what-- magnetic dipole moment, charged space, or > what? If two magnetically > attracted current loops move closer then energy is > moved away from the source that > *sustains* the current loops. From there it depends > if the current loop decreases in > current or they move apart. That's why I've stated > it's *temporary* energy in terms of > the electron spin ***unless*** something annihilates > the electron. If the electron is > annihilated after gaining such KE due to acceleration > then it's permanent energy. :-) > > > > Regards, > Paul Lowrance > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Paul > >> Michel Jullian wrote: > >>>> Where did this [kinetic energy] come from? > Simply > >> the energy you put into the loop to > >>>> establish the magnetic field. > >>> I don't know, do we have to put energy into a > >> positive charge so that it gets attracted > >> to a negative charge? > >> > >> > >> > >> According to physics, yes. If space is charge > then > >> that is a certain amount of energy. > >> Charged particles were created. They just didn't > >> magically appear. A positive and negative > >> charged particle can be created from two photon > beams. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Paul > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Never miss an email again! > Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/ >
