37650Re: Perpetual Motion
- Jan 26, 2014--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, John Berry <berry.john22@...>
> And a fluid aether seems very very messy (not easy to model), so when aether := field.
> static aether was dis-proven (M-M experiment) and when an alternative to an
> aether was proposed (SR) this left zero room for a lot of phenomena to be
> But then Einstein made up for his blunder with SR by also noting thatDo not abuse the meaning of is/be. Mass is not vis any more than width is volume.
> matter is energy (e=mc2) and stating that the aether must exist anyway, and
> then along came quantum physics that proposes waves and a foamy seething
> sea of virtual particles, and ZPE, Higgs field, frame dragging, super
> The fluid aether (that has never had a scrap of evidence against it) is
> essentially reborn under a multitude of different names.
> Once we see that there is more that atoms and subatomic particles, lightIn my model the field and mote are identical, a corollary to Newton's, Coulomb's, and Yukawa's laws--namely, their r-domain (which := field)--which bound motes below and to Hubble's, Snell's, and Einstein's laws which bound motes above.
> and electric and magnetic fields, but a medium of space that can have
> various different qualities impressed on it, many mysterious spooky things
> start to look explainable like the spooky poltergeist like results
> Hutchisongot, oh and ghosts and poltergeists become possible too, as
> does explaining
> telepathy, links between twins etc...
The Hutchison effect meseems magntostriction, diathermy, and Lenz effect with hýsteresis.
Gosts/eýd¾monia/cacod¾monia must be the result of Argand bodies: http://www.quora.com/Quantum-Mechanics/Why-dont-we-see-quantum-weirdness-in-everyday-world/answer/Autymn-Castleton.
> On that note, I have found that much like the twin effect, that even typingNo: http://google.com/search?q=%22ideomotor+effect%22; http://google.com/search?q=mesmerism.
> a random string in such an energy field can cause transmission of that
> energy, and many can feel it.
> See if you can feel any of these 3 strings:
> O- 59wycc484gw48gy 73gf94a8 2jF848;w%U2z
> You might feel a warmth, tingle, cool or pressure or other sensation in
> your palm, finders or face, some feel energy in the eyes.
> Of course you have to be willing to maybe become a tin foil hatter to even
> try it.
> I've even had some real skeptics feel it, but some believers feel nothing.
> It's not free energy, but this energy is the mechanism that allows the
> normal laws of physics to be violated.
What I ween from this new confirmation of Orchestrated Objective Reduction is that the neocortex is environmentally persistent; its kaotic or anharmonic modes are what forbid its decay: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140116085105.htm. However we do not often see gosts at streams, seas, or anywhere wet or much outdoors which should mean that these short circuit wit (vis/pneýma).
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:07 AM, George Wiseman <wiseman@...Another hick who can't spell its.
> > wrote:
> > Amy et al,
> > I do have a magnetic configuration that puts out more energy than I put
> > in; actually I hold it still and it accelerates on it's own when I let it
> > go. I'll be posting a video next month, as I have a few other projects
> > taking up my time at the moment.
> >Yep: http://www.quora.com/Physics/Have-the-known-true-laws-of-physics-ever-been-broken-ever/answer/Autymn-Castleton.
> > > From: amy_littledove@...
> > > To: email@example.com
> > > Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 20:41:35 -0800
> > > Subject: [free_energy] Perpetual Motion
> > >
> > > Hello members. I have been a member of this group for many years. I only
> > check in occasionally. I have seen many claims of "free energy" and
> > "perpetual motion" by quacks and frauds, dreamers, schemers, and scammers (
> > you know who you are). But is there anyone here who legitimately believes
> > they have defied laws of physics, and created true overunity devices?
> > >
> > > Please don't bore me, and everyone else with tired old cliche's about
> > the Wright Brothers Edison, etc. ( who honed their inventions in complete
> > compliance of physical laws).
> > >
> > > I have read the last hundred or so posts, and as far as I can tell, the
> > only people who believe in defying natural laws are tin-foil wearing
> > freaks. Am I wrong?
I would soon like to formalize a new class of device called ICE, the Intensive Curl Engine, that undoes these exact laws. One kind is my brainchild, the Perpetual Radiator-Conductor, that exploits the discontinuity between the Stefan-Boltzmann and Newton-Kelvin laws, namely the disparate equilibrium temperatures of two bodies. Also I believe the Scharnhorst effect allows one to harness negative vis to provide a perpetual cold sink to undo the Nernst theorem, most likely in the potential minimum of iron-nickel nuclei.
However I need to read up on radiative heat transfer to look for contraindications, such as if emissivity varies on the same order as temperature or conductivity (doubtful) or if there's a normal workfunction between two neutral sinks in contact (doubtful), and for what exactly happens at medial boundaries, but there may not be fele leads.
- << Previous post in topic