magnet motor
gdew...@gmail.com
apparatus on the internet I could find.
You can-not claim you did this as it takes months of work. From this
research I have derived a far less complicated magnet motor design.
I'm not the only one who build this. The list is very long, but in
contrast I do disclose the workings.
enjoy :-)
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
For those skilled in the art it should be obvious that I would love to
establish some exact math on this.
To address the most obvious replies:
The second law of thermodynamics prohibits the construction of a
perpetual motion machine "of the second kind."
There are two usual statements of this law.
Kelvin's formulation states that it is impossible for a system
operating in a cycle and in contact with one thermal reservoir to
perform positive work in the surroundings.
Clausius's formulation states that it is impossible for a system
operating in a cycle to produce positive heat flow from a colder body
to a hotter body. http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/SecondLawofThermodynamics.html
Holy nobelty William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin (aka - you can call me
Lord) is widely known from the scale of absolute temperature
measurement he claimed to have re-invented, Galileo Galilei invented a
rudimentary water thermometer in 1593. In 1714, Gabriel Fahrenheit
invented the first mercury thermometer, the modern thermometer.
VIP Kelvin also mentions: the conversion of heat (or caloric) into
mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered - but
a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory.
Here Mr Kelvin is measuring the impossible in doubts.
"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." sad Lord Kelvin -
president of the Royal Society - 1895. Later crawled back by
antagonists into "technically impossible" because it was in his days.
Ptolemy believed the planets and Sun to orbit the in the order
Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. This system became known
as the Ptolemaic system.
nonexistence speculations are never factual, their description of
perpetual motion is not to be taken seriously in any way.
On http://www.ajayonline.us/ we can read
" Einstein did not derive it mathematically but in true sense
speculated it. "
In short he stole half then speculated the other half. (no math.)
http://www.newebmasters.com/freeenergy/sm-text.html : "We don't
grant patents on perpetual motion machines," said the examiners at the
U.S. Patent Office. "It won't work because it violates the law of
Conservation of Energy," said one physicist after another. But
because, inventor Howard Johnson is not the sort of man to be
intimidated by such seemingly authoritative pronouncements, he now
owns U.S. Patent No. 4,151,431 which describes how it is possible to
generate motive power, as in a motor, using only the energy contained
in the atoms of permanent magnets. That's right. Johnson has
discovered how to build motors that run without an input of
electricity or any other kind of external energy!
The monumental nature of the invention is obvious, especially in a
world facing an alarming, escalating energy shortage. Yet inventor
Johnson is not rushing to peddle his creation as the end-all solution
to world- wide energy problems. He has more important work to do.
First, there's the need to refine his laboratory prototypes into
workable practical devices -in particular a 5,000-watt electric power
generator already in the building. His second and perhaps more
difficult major challenge: persuade a host of skeptics that his ideas
are indeed practical.
Johnson, who has been coping with disbelievers for decades, can be
very persuasive in a face-to-face encounter because he can not do more
than merely theorize; he can demonstrate working models that
unquestionably create motion using only permanent magnets. When this
writer was urged by the editor of SCIENCE & MECHANICS to make a
thousand mile pilgrimage to Blacksburg, Virginia, to meet with the
inventor, he went there as an "open-minded skeptic" and as a former
research Scientist determined not to be fooled. Within two days, this
former skeptic had become a believer. Here's why.
Doing the Unthinkable. Howard Johnson refuses to view the "laws"
of science as somehow sacred, so doing the unthinkable and succeeding
is second nature to him. If a particular law gets in the way, he sees
no harm in going around it for a while to see if there's something on
the other side. Johnson explains the persistent opposition he
experiences from the established scientific community this way:
"Physics is a measurement science and physicists are especially
determined to protect the 'Law' of Conservation of Energy. Thus the
physicists become game wardens who tell us what laws' we can't
violate. In this case they don't even know what the game is. But they
are so scared that I and my associates are going to violate some of
these laws, that they have to get to the pass to head us off!"
Paul Studier
> Unlike you (the reader) I can say I've looked at every overunity
> apparatus on the internet I could find.
>
> You can-not claim you did this as it takes months of work. From this
> research I have derived a far less complicated magnet motor design.
> I'm not the only one who build this. The list is very long, but in
> contrast I do disclose the workings.
>
> enjoy :-)
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
Let us know when you actually get this thing to work. People have been
working on magnet motors for over a 1000 years. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_wheel
--
Paul Studier <STUDIER2atpleasenospamtoPAULSTUDIERdotCOM>
When you work, you create.
When you win, you just take from the loser.
For an explanation, see http://paulstudier.com/win
gdew...@gmail.com
<stud...@pleasenospamtopaulstudier.com> wrote:
>[snip]
do you understand me when I say "I have researched all of them".
Do you grasp the meaning of those words?
Or are you to dumb?
Bill Ward
The meaning of those words is that you do not understand enough about what
you are doing to be taken seriously.
gdew...@gmail.com
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:54:09 -0800, gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 17, 10:11 pm, Paul Studier
> > <stud...@pleasenospamtopaulstudier.com> wrote:
> >>[snip]
>
> > do you understand me when I say "I have researched all of them".
>
> > Do you grasp the meaning of those words?
>
> The meaning of those words is that you do not understand enough about what
> you are doing to be taken seriously.
Hello Bill Ward
Yes I do understand. I don't care. What is the use of your statement?
Please feel free to either look at it and comment ON the invention
or .... well you know.... piss off and go bother some one else. :-)
If you want to explain about your failure to look at my invention
before you talk about me because you have such fixed opinion already
that would also be interesting. Not very rational but an explanation
would sure be interesting.
:-)
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
Eeyore
Bill Ward wrote:
> gdew...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Paul Studier <stud...@pleasenospamtopaulstudier.com> wrote:
> >
> > do you understand me when I say "I have researched all of them".
> >
> > Do you grasp the meaning of those words?
>
> The meaning of those words is that you do not understand enough about what
> you are doing to be taken seriously.
Maybe he doesn't realise that all electric motors already use magnetism.
Graham
Eeyore
"gdew...@gmail.com" wrote:
> Please feel free to either look at it and comment ON the invention
You haven't got an invention.
> or .... well you know.... piss off and go bother some one else. :-)
> If you want to explain about your failure to look at my invention
> before you talk about me because you have such fixed opinion already
> that would also be interesting. Not very rational but an explanation
> would sure be interesting.
>
> :-)
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
You're a know-nothing, stupid, ignorant, scientifically illiterate idiot k00k.
Graham
gdew...@gmail.com
wrote:
lol, this topic is not about you, not that you are not interesting
it's just not about you. Calling me names isn't reasonable in any way.
Please address the subject like a grownup. Thanks.
here is the link again.
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
I made this for those who think "it cant be"
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-it-cant-be
Bill Ward
> On Feb 18, 5:03 am, Bill Ward <b...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:54:09 -0800, gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Feb 17, 10:11 pm, Paul Studier
>> > <stud...@pleasenospamtopaulstudier.com> wrote:
>> >>[snip]
>>
>> > do you understand me when I say "I have researched all of them".
>>
>> > Do you grasp the meaning of those words?
>>
>> The meaning of those words is that you do not understand enough about
>> what you are doing to be taken seriously.
>
> Hello Bill Ward
>
> Yes I do understand. I don't care. What is the use of your statement?
> Please feel free to either look at it and comment ON the invention
I did both. You just didn't like my comment. Your arrogance far
exceeds your understanding, and you're not worth my time.
Goodbye.
gdew...@gmail.com
your comment on the invention didn't exist.
It was a pure nonsense comment just like this one.
:-)
gdew...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Bill Ward wrote:
Please, do review the invention not the inventor Graham.
thanks :-)
Eeyore
"gdew...@gmail.com" wrote:
" 4 magnets glued into spacings of a similar disk also fixed on an axle(also not
shown) The position of the magnets is what the invention is all about. Over each
90 degrees the next magnet is rotated 90 degrees. "
You're an ignorant stupid prick.
You have no 'invention' at all. All you have are a few stupid childish drawings
that illustrate your total ignorance of science. Go and get an education.
You're just an idiotic waste of space.
Graham
zzbu...@netscape.net
You wasting your time,
The only thing the morons on sci.energy
know about either mangets or motors
is that Al Gore has hemmoroids.
gdew...@gmail.com
wrote:
> You wasting your time,
not at all, you are waisting my time.
gdew...@gmail.com
> Unlike you (the reader) I can say I've looked at every overunity
> apparatus on the internet I could find.
>
> You can-not claim you did this as it takes months of work. From this
> research I have derived a far less complicated magnet motor design.
> I'm not the only one who build this. The list is very long, but in
> contrast I do disclose the workings.
>
> enjoy :-)
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> For those skilled in the art it should be obvious that I would love to
> establish some exact math on this.
>
> To address the most obvious replies:
>
> The second law of thermodynamics prohibits the construction of a
> perpetual motion machine "of the second kind."
>
> There are two usual statements of this law.
>
> Kelvin's formulation states that it is impossible for a system
> operating in a cycle and in contact with one thermal reservoir to
> perform positive work in the surroundings.
>
> Clausius's formulation states that it is impossible for a system
> operating in a cycle to produce positive heat flow from a colder body
>
> Holy nobelty William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin (aka - you can call me
> Lord) is widely known from the scale of absolute temperature
> measurement he claimed to have re-invented, Galileo Galilei invented a
> rudimentary water thermometer in 1593. In 1714, Gabriel Fahrenheit
> invented the first mercury thermometer, the modern thermometer.
>
> VIP Kelvin also mentions: the conversion of heat (or caloric) into
> mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered - but
> a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory.
>
> Here Mr Kelvin is measuring the impossible in doubts.
>
> "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." sad Lord Kelvin -
> president of the Royal Society - 1895. Later crawled back by
> antagonists into "technically impossible" because it was in his days.
>
> Ptolemy believed the planets and Sun to orbit the in the order
> Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. This system became known
> as the Ptolemaic system.
>
> nonexistence speculations are never factual, their description of
> perpetual motion is not to be taken seriously in any way.
>
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Helmholtz.html
Helmholtz's use of the word "force" corresponds to what later became
known as energy, so his law actually amounted to a statement of the
Law of conservation of energy.
http://rexresearch.com/barbat/barbat.htm
the overlooked exception to the energy-conservation rule that Hermann
von Helmholtz described in his 1847 doctrine on energy conservation:
"If . . . bodies possess forces which depend upon time and velocity,
or which act in directions other than lines which unite each pair of
material points, . . . then combinations of such bodies are possible
in which force may be either lost or gained ad infinitum."
---------------
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress?tag=energy&list=1