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

Re: [hameltech] Re: annoying numbers

Expand Messages
  • eddie x
    okay i think i understand ... From: To: Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 6:14 AM Subject: [hameltech] Re:
    Message 1 of 10 , Nov 30, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      okay i think i understand
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <mmorisey@...>
      To: <hameltech@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 6:14 AM
      Subject: [hameltech] Re: annoying numbers


      > Take it easy man. You joined on July 27th and we started that number
      > code up in October. So I don't see why you got all upset. I see you
      > are set to receive individual emails, so you probably don't use the
      > web page to read. In that case, the listing is at the footer of the
      > emails you receive.
      >
      > Like Addrian said, it is also at the home page of the group, which is
      > here:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hameltech
      >
      > Mike Mo.
      > co-moderator
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In hameltech@y..., zaltis@h... wrote:
      > > in the last week or so in here i have noticed some posts and
      > replies
      > > have numbers like 11111, 11112, 11114 in front of them. can
      > somebody
      > > please tell me what the *********** is what with that shit?
      >
      >
      > Header Codes
      > 11111: Theory, untested Hamel ideas
      > 11112: Building and balancing, progress
      > 11113: David Hamel reports
      > 11114: Non-hamel mysteries and energies
      > OT: "Off Topic"
      >
      > Post message: hameltech@yahoogroups.com
      > Subscribe: hameltech-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > Unsubscribe: hameltech-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > List owner: hameltech-owner@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • Bryan St.Clair
      Val, First, the cones need to be nearly weightless when sitting in their suspension rings! At this point, I don t really care where the physical point of
      Message 2 of 10 , Dec 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Val,

        First, the cones need to be nearly weightless when
        sitting in their suspension rings! At this point, I
        don't really care where the physical point of
        reference between the suspension ring and cone ring
        is, as long as everything floats correctly.
        Second, I don't have a good formula for figureing the
        rejection magnets yet, as the set-ups that I've tried
        with more success haven't been what I'd originally
        thought they should be. My rejection magnets are all
        smaller than they appear to need to be using the
        matrix. Also, I've had much better luck using
        different sized magnets between the top cone and lid
        magnet. With my M3CD, which is a 4 inch cone design,
        I ended up with a 3/4" round magnet on the top cone,
        with a 3/8" round magnet on the lid.
        Now that I'm working bigger, I thought that maybe
        this was an anomoly with the smaller devices, but it
        also seems to be an issue with the larger devices
        also. The 45GD uses 19.5" cones, and I've got 3.75"
        doughnut magnets in the center of each of them. Using
        that size for a rejection magnet turned out to be a
        problem.
        First off, it didn't work! It would viberate for a
        few minutes then stop.
        Second, it cracked one of the rejection magnets! I
        believe that it cracked because of an energy
        viberation problem using that size magnet for the
        rejection.
        Now I'm using a 1.75" doughnut magnet, with a .75"
        round magnet in the center of it, as the cone
        rejection magnet. The lid magnet is a stack of five
        of the .75" round magnets.
        The 45GD has been viberateing now for close to a
        month! I'm still in the fine-tuneing stages also, but
        getting closer!
        Good luck with your device!! If you have questions,
        don't hesitate to contact me! I'm not an expert, but
        I think that David Hamel is the only real expert that
        I know and we're just trying to learn what he already
        understands.

        Truly,
        Bryan St.Clair

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
        http://shopping.yahoo.com
      • Val Gruno
        Hi Mike Mo, I have repositoned the cones. The verticle height is now about 15mm. Before your post it was about 6mm. They are at the point where they want to
        Message 3 of 10 , Dec 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment

           Hi Mike Mo,

          I have repositoned the cones. The verticle height is now about 15mm. Before your post it was about 6mm. They are at the point where they want to lift out of the rings floating if you will. I have read your post on Eulers Disk and found it informative. As soon as Bryan gives me an answer to my question --the answer I think he will give --I will give you a theory which I have been thinking about for some time regarding the cones.If he does not give me the answer that I am looking for I will not waste anybodys time with the theory.

          Val



          Do You Yahoo!?
          Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.