huh, I see you already made some posts on it...
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 9:04 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey, good to see you around, last I recall you had some tesla binary > electromagnet thingy which I didn't understand. (my description of which may > be so poor as to confuse you) > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Harvey Norris <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > From: Michael Crosiar <[email protected]> >> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Relativistic magnetic fields and time >> > To: [email protected] >> > Date: Wednesday, June 10, 2009, 2:49 AM >> > >Ok, well >> > if it's axial field orientation then I would say you >> > have walked right into the N-Machine paradox. >> > >> > >Which is, does the magnetic field actually rotate when >> > you rotate a magnet on an axial orientation? >> Only during changes in time of the angular momentum. >> > >> > >> > For me I see no paradox. And yes, I have thought of the >> > N-Machine a lot in this regard. >> > >> > >It is very difficult to prove since the only effect >> > from an axially rotating magnet is a generally very weak >> > electric field gradient. >> The effect is much greater if the rotating part is instead the >> unmagnetised material contained as the reluctance pathways in the design of >> the disc shaped pole face rotor ELECTROMAGNETIC of the alternator design. In >> that case a CONSTANT angular momentum pivots the spins of the random >> ferromagnetic domains to produce moving magnetism external to its own >> movement. >> HDN >> >> >
