Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Magnetism vs Electricity

Expand Messages
  • Gary S.
    ... No, because magnetism IS well understood we know that it is a poor analogy. Magnetism is a pseudo force caused by different charge densities, often caused
    Message 1 of 43 , Jul 6, 2006
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In free_energy@yahoogroups.com, "xingu1306" <xingu1306@...> wrote:
      >
      > We all know by now as a fact, that magnetism is needed, one way or
      > another, to produce electricity. If not in the use of physical
      > magnets as in AC and DC then in atomic particle magnets inside the
      > current. About voltages and currents we already know a lot,
      > otherwise we were not capable of making such ingenious devices we
      > have right now.
      > Yet, magnetism is poorly understood, no matter what Quantum
      > Mechanics tells us, otherwise we probably should have had devices
      > working on magnetism like the ones we already have on electricity.

      No, because magnetism IS well understood we know that it is a poor
      analogy. Magnetism is a pseudo force caused by different charge
      densities, often caused by Relativistic shifts due to charge carrier
      drift speeds.

      > My suggestion would than be: approach magnetism as we did with
      > electricity. Let us try to make equivalents for resistors
      > (shielding), capacitators (temporary varying strength storage one
      > way magnets), diodes (one way magnets) and so on. (Let's make things
      > better, sounds familiar?). If this were possible, I'm sure we could
      > have major breakthroughs in various fields of research.

      If this were possible? That's the point -- it's not. You should take
      some time to learn about physics as it was figured out in the last
      century. Magnetism is NOT all that complicated, it's just confusing
      unless you understand the nuances of Relativity.

      > I think it would already be a big breakthrough when we were to
      > succeed in the simple on and off switching of a magnet, without the
      > aid of electricity, without repositioning it and without loosing the
      > yet unidentified force within a magnet.
      >

      That "unidentified force" is electrostatic interaction (attraction and
      repulsion). Nothing myserious, and unless you know of an energy free
      way to move oribitals and spin properties of charge carriers you can't
      build your energy free magnet switch.

      > So I am very curious if somebody could tell, if there are already
      > devices doing what is described.
      >

      Read and learn:

      http://www.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~dnj/teaching/160mag/160mag.htm
      http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/rel_el_mag.html
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field
      http://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/mrr/MRRtalk.html
    • Wayne Gage
      The human condition is just one more thing that McCutcheon is clueless about. And when someone makes subjective comparisons when trying to make a point I
      Message 43 of 43 , Jul 23, 2006
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        The human condition is just one more thing that McCutcheon is clueless
        about. And when someone makes subjective comparisons when trying to
        make a point I suspect that person is selling snake oil.
        Science is a continuous learning process; why just the other day it
        was brought to my attention that I have been tying my shoe laces
        incorrectly for the last 55 years, see; you're never too old to learn.

        --- In free_energy@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Schum" <thomasjschum@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > So, I bought the book from Amazon, and it arrived yesterday.
        > I spent the evening slowly reading the first chapter (the one you
        can
        > download for free).
        >
        > McCutcheon knows why hardcore skeptics are the way they are, and
        > describes that clearly in the first chapter (profoundly so). It
        isn't
        > their fault, it is the training they have received that has not
        given
        > them the tools to think beyond the intrinsic limits of that training.
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.