magnet motor
gdew...@gmail.com
I think I've found real proof.
I obviously need professional help.
Please, share your thoughts....
gdew...@gmail.com
ghee dumb...
don't you know about the laws of thermodynamics?
what an idiot!!!!!!
Going to kill myself now.
Ben Newsam
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I obviously need professional help.
Please go and get some.
gdew...@gmail.com
about?
You clearly cant even stomach looking at the design.
Hilarious!-
->->->->->->->->->-> PERPETUAL MOTION <-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<
booooo hoooooo DANGER !!! FEAR !!! booooo booooooooo
something like that?
Sam Wormley
Perhaps you don't get it... physics has advanced enough over the
last two centuries to understand why perpetual motion machine
can't work. It wouldn't hurt you to do some self education Gaby.
T Wake
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171019454.7...@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Given your comment in the first post ("I obviously need professional help")
I find the fact you are replying to your self (and insulting yourself at
that) to be doubly entertaining.
If you don't mind me asking but are you from the Netherlands? If so, I never
realised they had Amish cults there.
gdew...@gmail.com
> gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Hello, I had this wonderful idea for a permanent magnet motor but now
> > I think I've found real proof.
>
> > I obviously need professional help.
>
> > Please, share your thoughts....
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> Perhaps you don't get it...
good point, maybe you don't get it. exactly !
>physics has advanced enough
I don't agree, I think it should advance far more still. LOTS!
>over the last two centuries to understand why perpetual motion machine can't work.
Yeah that was 300 years ago. Then came Jesus eh I mean Einstein and he
made a hole in japan eh I mean he made up a hand full of laughable
theories. like E = MCC where C is the inconstancy and M is the
macaroni? O wait Newton was wrong to ( no I don't mean 911), but damn
that really turns physics upside down? Now nothing works anymore?
This is why you all hate me? YES?? hahahaha How do you keep up with
yourself? Do you work out?
>It wouldn't hurt you to do some self education Gaby.
It is reasonable for you to make the exact same effort to fully
disprove my theory. You would have to attempt to make it work tho.
Self-sabotage is dis-allowed.
The comment visitor ratio is 1 page per 2 comments. here is a drawing
in case you fear visiting my page.
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/self-interaction.jpg
I CLAIM THE ACTION IS NOT EQUAL TO THE INTER. ^___^
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/evedance.jpg
E1 - E2 = 0
Look over the beautiful website then put 2 magnets on the table and
LOOK.
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
Then put your hands on the screen (first put down the magnets) and say
P E R P E T U A L M O T I O N using your deepest voice.
Then you will think it's the perfect thing to email to all your
friends.
Then they will tell you about the laws of physics. (obviously)
You then copy and past or quote this exact text.
There are no rewards in this game.
Phineas T Puddleduck
"gdew...@gmail.com" <gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Look over the beautiful website then put 2 magnets on the table and
> LOOK.
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> Then put your hands on the screen (first put down the magnets) and say
> P E R P E T U A L M O T I O N using your deepest voice.
You're just trolling. PLONK
--
<-Coffee Boy-> = Preferably white, with two sugars
Saucerheads - denying the blatantly obvious since 2000.
gdew...@gmail.com
<phineaspuddled...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> In article <1171072366.779838.230...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Look over the beautiful website then put 2 magnets on the table and
> > LOOK.
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> > Then put your hands on the screen (first put down the magnets) and say
> > P E R P E T U A L M O T I O N using your deepest voice.
>
> You're just trolling. PLONK
Read the whole post plz. you reply in 1 second.
gdew...@gmail.com
>
> I've always tried to put a positive spin on things....................
>
> "Nice graphics!"
>
> Good Luck
Yeah spin, maybe it should be looked at in the context of my weblog so
that peeps can sufficiently research me. ghehehe
Sam Wormley
Phineas is right, you appear to be an untutored fool itch'n for
a fight.
+------------+ +---------------------------------------------+
| PLEASE | | BEST TO IGNORE ATTENTION SEEKING TROLLS |
| DO NOT | | LIKE Gaby De Wilde -- THEY DRY |
| FEED | | UP AND BLOW AWAY WITHOUT FEEDBACK |
| DA | | |
| TROLLS | | http://www.angelfire.com/space/usenet/ |
+------------+ +---------------------------------------------+
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
`\ '/ / ' / `\ '/ / ' / `\ '/ / ' /
Dumbledore
"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:45CC9CA3...@hate.spam.net...
[snip river of shit from Schwartzcyst]
Schwartz:
http://tinyurl.com/ck9r2
"Uncle Fuckwit" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:45C399C4...@hate.spam.net...
> Newtonian physics is infinite lightspeed (instantaneous knowledge of
> all aspects of a system),
You fuckin' ignorant, stoooopid, LYING bastard!
ROEMER,DOPPLER, MICHELSON, SAGNAC!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_R%C3%B8mer
"Cassini had observed the moons of Jupiter between 1666 and 1668, and
discovered discrepancies in his measurements that, at first, he attributed
to light having a finite speed."
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/Sagnac.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doppler/Doppler.htm
Einstein: "we shall, however, find in what follows, that the velocity of
light in our theory plays the part, physically, of an infinitely great
velocity."
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
Get the fuck out of the river of shit, you are the biggest TORD in it, you
lying fuckheaded cunt! Go and worship Nehemiah Scudder!
FUCK OFF and DIE!
This message is for *your* personal safety, brought to *you* by Dumbledore,
the computer of Androcles, having passed my Turing Test
using Uncle Phuckwit for a guinea pig. How is my driving?
Call 1-800-555-1234
http://www.carmagneticsigns.co.uk/images/small/P_Plates.jpg
Worn with pride.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-plate
Ross A. Finlayson
No, I am trolling.
Magnet motor? Well, you put electricity in it and it spins around,
alternating current as in house current.
See you wind up the motor with magnetic wire then put it on the axle
and electricity goes both ways around the magnets.
You don't see much of that perpetual motion there.
Time is perpetual forward motion.
Ross
gdew...@gmail.com
> <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
ghee dumb....
gdew...@gmail.com
> On 9 Feb 2007 03:09:02 -0800, "gdewi...@gmail.com"
you didn't get it. Thatz for sure. hahaha
gdew...@gmail.com
> troll gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 10, 2:55 am, Phineas T Puddleduck
> > <phineaspuddled...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> In article <1171072366.779838.230...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >> "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Look over the beautiful website then put 2 magnets on the table and
> >>> LOOK.
> >>>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
> >>> Then put your hands on the screen (first put down the magnets) and say
> >>> P E R P E T U A L M O T I O N using your deepest voice.
> >> You're just trolling. PLONK
>
> > Read the whole post plz. you reply in 1 second.
>
> Phineas is right, you appear to be an untutored fool itch'n for
> a fight.
I claim you cant address the very topic of this discussion.
You are the one picking the fight and getting your ass owned verbally
over and over and over again.
If this isn't amusing you you can always address the topic or ignore
it. You make this all to clear in your last post.
As you cant ignore the topic you are clearly interested in it, how
this interest works is all to obvious.
You are interested in destroying the interest of others. CLEARLY!!
You are already on the last means of degrading my invention being
"personal insults".
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!
I know exactly what you are trying to do and why you are doing it.
LOL, Insult me 100 times then say I'm a troll. ghehehehe
this formula isn't going to work this time.
You are not interesting and I am. How about that?
It's not like I'm reading any of your other posts after this one.
While I have this incredibly interesting weblog here.
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
This absolutely leverages your complaints to my advantage. ghehehehehe
gdew...@gmail.com
> > "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Look over the beautiful website then put 2 magnets on the table and
> > > LOOK.
>
> > >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> > > Then put your hands on the screen (first put down the magnets) and say
> > > P E R P E T U A L M O T I O N using your deepest voice.
>
> > You're just trolling. PLONK
>
> > --
> > <-Coffee Boy-> = Preferably white, with two sugars
> > Saucerheads - denying the blatantly obvious since 2000.
>
> No, I am trolling.
>
> Magnet motor? Well, you put electricity in it and it spins around,
> alternating current as in house current.
>
> See you wind up the motor with magnetic wire then put it on the axle
> and electricity goes both ways around the magnets.
>
> You don't see much of that perpetual motion there.
>
> Time is perpetual forward motion.
>
> Ross
The idea is to move 1 magnet closer to another so that the other
magnet rotates from the interaction. This rotation accelerates
tremendously so after 1 mm of it the incoming magnet can be moved away
again.
Because the magnet we move is both attracted and repelled in
relatively equal amounts it can move with very little resistance true
the field of the secondary magnet.
Can we talk about this?
Do you allow a discussion about this?
T Wake
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171152634.2...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Can I assume you are talking to yourself once more?
> don't you know about the laws of thermodynamics?
I have heard the term once or twice. Why?
gdew...@gmail.com
> Can I assume you are talking to yourself once more?
o yes! please do.
Bill Snyder
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
Confirming that the only one credulous enough to believe in your magic
motor is you, huh?
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
Art Deco
Look at this, he/she/it has learned to honor his/her/its betters with
subject lines. How unusual.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"To err is human, to cover it up is Weasel" -- Dogbert
gdew...@gmail.com
What better way to honor TWake's revelation?
Can you assume I'm talking to myself as well as he can?
That would be great. thanks.
T Wake
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171158904....@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 11, 2:10 am, "T Wake" <usenet.es...@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
>> Can I assume you are talking to yourself once more?
>
> o yes! please do.
>
Problem solved then.
You need to try harder with your trolling, BTW.
gdew...@gmail.com
> <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I don't intend to be very good at it.
It's pointless, you are far better at it and have the huge advantage
of your previous art. Most people capable of producing an interesting
reply should have left long ago with such professional stalkerazzi. My
only hope is that I can force you or your troll friends to fabricate a
reasonable comment on my invention. This of course is impossible. I
get defeated either way.
The irony of this artificial reality is so large it can only be
defeated by wearing it out. Thousands of people have said I was nuts,
I can only conclude it's a point of view. Unlike the people who are
normally not observed as such it only makes me giggle.
So explain to me again how my invention can-not work. :-)
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
I challenge you to say something nice. hehehe
Ben Newsam
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Because the magnet we move is both attracted and repelled in
>relatively equal amounts it can move with very little resistance true
>the field of the secondary magnet.
>
>Can we talk about this?
>
>Do you allow a discussion about this?
You can cause it to rotate. So?
gdew...@gmail.com
> On 10 Feb 2007 16:29:50 -0800, "gdewi...@gmail.com"
>
> <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Because the magnet we move is both attracted and repelled in
> >relatively equal amounts it can move with very little resistance true
> >the field of the secondary magnet.
>
> >Can we talk about this?
>
> >Do you allow a discussion about this?
>
> You can cause it to rotate. So?
90 degrees - force on primary magnet is zero
The work OUT of the system is the sum of repulsion and
attraction.
95 degrees - attractive force on primary magnet is now bigger as the
repulsive force.
The work that goes IN is the subtraction of repulsion from
attraction.
simple.
Ross A. Finlayson
Those are interesting motors. How about, just an inductive trackball
motor.
Consider this thread, obviously people talk about this kind of thing
on sci.physics before.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/7329fcc171f28bc0/
Make the motor with the windings and the magnet wire. That's how I
would do it.
Have a nice day,
Ross F.
gdew...@gmail.com
>
> Make the motor with the windings and the magnet wire. That's how I
> would do it.
>
> Have a nice day,
>
> Ross F.
Interesting topic.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/e024428686cf06c6
The box is an inertial propulsion device.
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress?tag=inertialpropulsion&list=1
fun :-)
Ross A. Finlayson
No, it's reciprocating.
Still fun.
If you had a spring in it that wound down, then it would be a
propulsion device, as you put electricity into it. Reference frame
with the mechanics and electricity and so on.
I have a suggestion for the Google Groups, hey in the advanced search
frame, return results in the advanced search frame.
I think my favorite part of the thread is the joke. That, and the
spacetime wheel, that is really great.
Ross
Sam Wormley
>
> 90 degrees - force on primary magnet is zero
>
Ever heard on Newton's third law? Git yerself an education kid!
Simple Simon
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171188391.8...@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
I would have accepted the unanimous verdict that you must accept the premise
that you are stupider than shit since you can't prove otherwise, except for
the fact that I built your motor and it works!
Now please tell me how to turn the bloody thing off.
Keep up the good work,
Simon.
gdew...@gmail.com
> <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Sam Wormley
> Hello, I had this wonderful idea for a permanent magnet motor but now
> I think I've found real proof.
>
> I obviously need professional help.
>
> Please, share your thoughts....
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
You (yes you, Gaby) can do experiments to verify the laws of
thermodynamics. You will quickly find that your "invention",
which is really no more than an ill conceived idea, suffers
from friction and radiation.... it's a real energy loser.
There is a reason perpetual motion machines can't work. Learn
thermodynamics...
gdew...@gmail.com
You need evidence for your claim
you are a fraud.
Sam Wormley
You, Gaby, can look up the historical papers, data, and all
the evidence you need in the area of conservation of energy
and thermodynamics. The record is clear... and the experiments
are repeatable... many done routinely in classrooms of colleges,
universities and even in high schools.
OK--Given that there IS friction and that there IS radiation
from accelerating magnets, your "device" loses energy in the form
of radiation and is, therefore, slowing down, eventually to stop
its rotational motion.
gdew...@gmail.com
> gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 8:18 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> >> gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Hello, I had this wonderful idea for a permanent magnet motor but now
> >>> I think I've found real proof.
> >>> I obviously need professional help.
> >>> Please, share your thoughts....
> >>>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
> >> You (yes you, Gaby) can do experiments to verify the laws of
> >> thermodynamics. You will quickly find that your "invention",
> >> which is really no more than an ill conceived idea, suffers
> >> from friction and radiation.... it's a real energy loser.
>
> >> There is a reason perpetual motion machines can't work. Learn
> >> thermodynamics...
>
> > You need evidence for your claim
>
> > you are a fraud.
>
> You, Gaby, can look up the historical papers, data, and all
> the evidence you need in the area of conservation of energy
> and thermodynamics. The record is clear..
That a laughable statement. There is nothing clear but there are
people claiming it's perfectly clear on either side. can we say
""HUH???""
And they go as far as to say "it is widely accepted". HUH ?????
Are we widely accepting something for anyone else but our-self now?
Even beyond questioning? There are lots of people who do not agree
with this. It's widely disagreeable as it's widely disagreeing with
reality.
The 3 of those make it a totally irrational ramble, there now is
reason to think it's rubbish.
>. and the experiments
> are repeatable... many done routinely in classrooms of colleges,
> universities and even in high schools.
>
> OK--Given that there IS friction and that there IS radiation
> from accelerating magnets, your "device" loses energy in the form
> of radiation and is, therefore, slowing down, eventually to stop
> its rotational motion.
This is fantastic stuff. It's just priceless. There will be so much
friction the device explodes then it will radiate large chunks of
magnet. (Potentially lethal). I can imagine you think what you think
and why you think this but can you also imagine how I fabricated my
conclusion? Can you imagine I would not be here arguing with you if I
was not convinced that
1+1 = 2
and
1-1=0
so that gives us a ratio of interaction of 2:0
You now understand how convinced I am exactly, doesn't that bother you
at all? Do you have such unintelligent picture of me? Are you sure? I
claim it's awfully simple vector stuff? Here is my drawing again.
N
.| ...N-S
S
At the left we have 2 torque, at the right we have 1 repulsion and 1
attraction for a handsome total of zero.(0) I don't need to be able to
do fancy calculations I have 2 hands and 2 magnets this is more then
enough to see what happens. The calculation is your job. I do not
claim to know any physics but a stone age theory that dismisses my
handy work is just not good enough for me. I can perfectly imagine
what easter bunny logic lurks behind this theory.
As I now am so unintelligently burn marked. Lets investigate you for a
bit. Would you have a good feeling if you where spreading lies about
this? Lets imagine you are being used as a tool to suppress
technology Would you have a good feeling about that? Insert your own
environment and global wealth distribution story here. Wouldn't you
think your sincere dishonesty is a bit out of place under this topic
you just picked?
So here I sit with the invention that is going to save the world
(people say) and you are going to unmake this with lies? This should
obviously put much larger question-marks with your character. :-)
It's extremely interesting because there are at least 10 people right
here who agree with you from the deepest of their fixed believe-
system.
The final imagination is one where some one who knows a lot but
doesn't think meets some one who doesn't know anything and thinks all
of the time.
You can pick who is who to make it really philosophical.
2 : 0
hehehe
Sam Wormley
>>
>> OK--Given that there IS friction and that there IS radiation
>> from accelerating magnets, your "device" loses energy in the form
>> of radiation and is, therefore, slowing down, eventually to stop
>> its rotational motion.
>
> This is fantastic stuff. It's just priceless. There will be so much
> friction the device explodes then it will radiate large chunks of
> magnet. (Potentially lethal). I can imagine you think what you think
> and why you think this but can you also imagine how I fabricated my
> conclusion? Can you imagine I would not be here arguing with you if I
> was not convinced that...
>
Gaby has failed to understand that the radiation is "continuous",
not explosive.
gdew...@gmail.com
gdew...@gmail.com
was not convinced that
1+1 = 2
and
1-1=0
N
.| ...N-S
S
read the interesting part to will you?
Eric Gisse
The entire theory that would be used to calculate it has two things at
the core:
1) Conservation of energy.
2) Magnetic fields do no work.
Do you honestly believe that you, someone with no education in
physics, can overturn physics by fiddling with magnets? Even when this
newsgroup gets several attempts a year at attacking the same problem
the SAME WAY?
>
> As I now am so unintelligently burn marked. Lets investigate you for a
> bit. Would you have a good feeling if you where spreading lies about
> this? Lets imagine you are being used as a tool to suppress
> technology Would you have a good feeling about that? Insert your own
> environment and global wealth distribution story here. Wouldn't you
> think your sincere dishonesty is a bit out of place under this topic
> you just picked?
>
> So here I sit with the invention that is going to save the world
> (people say) and you are going to unmake this with lies? This should
> obviously put much larger question-marks with your character. :-)
No, *YOU* say it will save the world. The rest of the world, the tiny
tiny part that has even noticed your junk, has rolled its' eyes and
moved on.
>
> It's extremely interesting because there are at least 10 people right
> here who agree with you from the deepest of their fixed believe-
> system.
I am one of those people. I also, along with Sam, have the benefit of
a university education based upon practical experimentation and
theoretical work.
Notice that you cannot make such a claim.
Ben Newsam
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Can you imagine I would not be here arguing with you if I
>was not convinced that
>
>1+1 = 2
>
> and
>
>1-1=0
>
>so that gives us a ratio of interaction of 2:0
<Rolls eyes> What kind of a ratio is that?
>You now understand how convinced I am exactly, doesn't that bother you
>at all?
Nope.
> Do you have such unintelligent picture of me?
Yep.
gdew...@gmail.com
yes exactly! Isn't this amazing? It looks as if we worship different
gods? Lets not defend our religions with blood. We should agree to
disagree. I claim your god is a false one. Calling me all kinds of
funny names is not going to change my mind. You have tried to silence
me 100 times now. This is extra evidence for my claim, this is what
happened to all previous inventions.
I leave it up to you to figure out why I am so convinced. Could it be
that there are gravity engines, vortex engines, fusion reactors,
magnet motors, professional electrolysis, Egyptian batteries, pulse
motors, oscillators, could it be there are even free energy apparatus
based on mud?
Is that all lies? And you don't need evidence for your mass
accusation? What ground do you have to swing your textbook over your
head at them? So far you arbitrary parrot the textbook and that just
doesn't dis-prove anything. Everything in that text book of yours was
established in the same way as my theory.
Read your Newton, this man used his hands! He used every hard figure
he could put his hands on. Does that thought frighten you desk pod
people? Because I think it should.
What if you could move mass in such a way that it gains mechanical
energy?
You would be horrified right?
But why cant you be objective?
I challenge you to deny any of the things I mention with facts not
with theories.
gravity engines, vortex engines, fusion reactors, magnet motors,
electrolysis, Egyptian batteries, pulse motors, oscillators, mud?
You name it and I will debunk you.
How dare you dismiss things and lie about them.
Your god is fake.
:-)
Ben Newsam
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Is that all lies?
Yes.
> And you don't need evidence for your mass
>accusation? What ground do you have to swing your textbook over your
>head at them?
Because no working free energy device has ever been built, and you are
no exception to this.
Eric Gisse
Oh yes, I'm not telling you to shut the fuck up because I'm simply
tired of cranks polluting this newsgroup, it is obviously because I'm
trying to suppress the amazing AMAZING invention of "two mangets stuck
together".
>
> I leave it up to you to figure out why I am so convinced. Could it be
> that there are gravity engines, vortex engines, fusion reactors,
> magnet motors, professional electrolysis, Egyptian batteries, pulse
> motors, oscillators, could it be there are even free energy apparatus
> based on mud?
You don't have any idea how any of the real devices in your list work,
so you lump them together with shit like "gravity engines".
>
> Is that all lies? And you don't need evidence for your mass
> accusation? What ground do you have to swing your textbook over your
> head at them? So far you arbitrary parrot the textbook and that just
> doesn't dis-prove anything. Everything in that text book of yours was
> established in the same way as my theory.
You don't even have a theory. You have no education in physics - you
can't calculate how much energy will be obtained from your
'invention'. You have no idea at all. You ignore the people who do
know how to calculate it, and you ignore the answer: 0, because
magnetic fields cannot do work.
>
> Read your Newton, this man used his hands! He used every hard figure
> he could put his hands on. Does that thought frighten you desk pod
> people? Because I think it should.
Newton also believed in alchemy. Pick a better, more recent, example.
>
> What if you could move mass in such a way that it gains mechanical
> energy?
>
> You would be horrified right?
Hell no, I'd be amazed.
I don't object based on personal desires - I object based on empirical
reality, of which you are completely ignorant.
>
> But why cant you be objective?
>
> I challenge you to deny any of the things I mention with facts not
> with theories.
>
> gravity engines, vortex engines, fusion reactors, magnet motors,
> electrolysis, Egyptian batteries, pulse motors, oscillators, mud?
Gravity engines do not, and can not, exist.
>
> You name it and I will debunk you.
Really? With my background in physics I can tell you exactly how these
real world devices work. What is your background? Google?
>
> How dare you dismiss things and lie about them.
>
> Your god is fake.
>
> :-)
Moron. Get the fuck out of this newsgroup.
You will find no supporters here. I can clearly see that you are only
here because you are tired of your blog being ignored, and ideas
mocked on the free energy boards. You have no background in physics -
you cannot counter the simple consequence of Maxwell's equations which
govern magnetic and electric fields : magnetic fields do no work.
Sam Wormley
>
> So here I sit with the invention that is going to save the world
> (people say) and you are going to unmake this with lies? This should
> obviously put much larger question-marks with your character. :-)
>
You seem to feel threatened, Gaby. And you seem to have the
used buggy whip salesman's gift for the Gab... but you can't
fool mother nature.
hanson
[Gaby] <gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171355848.7...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
that he is convinced to save the world, just like the Einstein
Dingleberries do... both suffering from that delusion, both
sides doing their own semi-profound frame dragging... but
not really knowing what they are dragging around and much
less what they are saving the world **from** ... like...
"Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> who wrote:
>
[Gaby]
So here I sit with the invention that is going to save the world
(people say) and you are going to unmake this with lies? This should
obviously put much larger question-marks with your character. :-)
>>
No, *YOU* say it will save the world. The rest of the world, the tiny
tiny part that has even noticed your junk, has rolled its' eyes and
>
[Gaby is calling on God]
yes exactly! Isn't this amazing? It looks as if we worship different
gods? Lets not defend our religions with blood. We should agree to
disagree. I claim your god is a false one. Calling me all kinds of
funny names is not going to change my mind. You have tried to silence
me 100 times now. This is extra evidence for my claim, this is what
happened to all previous inventions.
>
I leave it up to you to figure out why I am so convinced. Could it be
that there are gravity engines, vortex engines, fusion reactors,
magnet motors, professional electrolysis, Egyptian batteries, pulse
motors, oscillators, could it be there are even free energy apparatus
based on mud?
>
Is that all lies? And you don't need evidence for your mass
accusation? What ground do you have to swing your textbook over your
head at them? So far you arbitrary parrot the textbook and that just
doesn't dis-prove anything. Everything in that text book of yours was
established in the same way as my theory.
>
Read your Newton, this man used his hands! He used every hard figure
he could put his hands on. Does that thought frighten you desk pod
people? Because I think it should. What if you could move mass in
> such a way that it gains mechanical > energy?
> I challenge you to deny any of the things I mention with facts not
> magnet motors, electrolysis, Egyptian batteries, pulse motors,
> How dare you dismiss things and lie about them.
> Your god is fake.
>
... Gabi, certainly your sermon here, not necessarily your machine
though, has assumed a certain perpetual magnetism. That is good!
Now, you must ask Eric and the world to send you money and to
become investment partners in/for your work. Your idea of invoking
god to promote your goals is indeed a splendid coup, because you
see, even physics, being a social enterprise, has deep religious
under-tones. ..... ahahahaha... Carry on, dudes. I love your show.
ahahaha... ahahahanson
gdew...@gmail.com
> .... ahahahaha... HAHAHAHA... ahahaha... ahahaha...[Gaby] <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
look how wrong you are:
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/mracle4.jpg
This is not 1800. You didn't study your jetsons properly.
http://www.cartoon-factory.com/disney/view.cgi?ID=383871&cel=Jetsons,%20Yogi%20&%20Boo-Boo
Puppet_Sock
> Hello, I had this wonderful idea for a permanent magnet motor but now
> I think I've found real proof.
Sigh. Who put this record on again?
Some years ago, when I was a kid living on the family farm,
there was this guy down the road with a pasture that was
divided in two by a roadway. And there was a tunnel under
the road so that the cows could move back and forth as
they pleased.
Now this farmer was pretty weird. He was convinced that
if the cows just walked through this tunnel in exactly the
right way, more cows would come out than went in. He
was just *sure* of it, and no amount of telling him that
walking through a tunnel didn't change the number of
cows would sway him in the slightest. Even taking him
on a walk through the tunnel with a cow didn't have any
effect. He just knew that if the cows would just walk
through there in the right way, he'd have as many cows
as he wanted for free.
One very hot day, one of his cows went in the tunnel for
the shade. And while in there, she gave birth to a calf.
>From that day on, the farmer was just intolerable. He
simply would not hear of any such thing as cows giving
birth. No sir. He knew a tunnel-generated calf when he
saw one.
Eventually he was led off to places with padded walls.
And everybody else was very happy.
Electromagnetism is a conservative force. It is mathematically
proved that whatever energy you start with is exactly the
amount you finish with. It can move around, change form
or arrangement, exist as heat or light or motion, but it
never changes amount. Walking through tunnels does
not change the number of cows.
But what about some complicated arrangement of magnets
and belts and pulleys and tunnels and ...?
The conditions for the theorm are quite general. If the only
physics you've got is E&M, then energy is conserved.
So if you want energy out, you've got to have a pregnant
cow, er, other physics besides E&M. Because you can't
fool us with just a tunnel. Tunnels do not spontaneously
change the number of cows, and E&M conserves energy.
Your "magnet motor" is bull.
Socks
Szczepan Bialek
"Eric Gisse":
> You don't even have a theory. You have no education in physics - you
> can't calculate how much energy will be obtained from your
> 'invention'. You have no idea at all. You ignore the people who do
> know how to calculate it, and you ignore the answer: 0, because
> magnetic fields cannot do work.
Magnets and electrets can do work because inside them energy is stored. When
a magnet lifts a piece of steel the magnet do work. This work is changed
into potential energy of the assembly (magnet and the piece).
> You will find no supporters here. I can clearly see that you are only
> here because you are tired of your blog being ignored, and ideas
> mocked on the free energy boards. You have no background in physics -
> you cannot counter the simple consequence of Maxwell's equations which
> govern magnetic and electric fields : magnetic fields do no work.
I have supported him for two days. You did not read my posts.
S*
Szczepan Bialek
"Puppet_Sock" :
> Your "magnet motor" is bull.
His and another are O.K. Read my posts I have sent for two days.
S*
Eric Gisse
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
> "Eric Gisse":
> > You don't even have a theory. You have no education in physics - you
> > can't calculate how much energy will be obtained from your
> > 'invention'. You have no idea at all. You ignore the people who do
> > know how to calculate it, and you ignore the answer: 0, because
> > magnetic fields cannot do work.
>
> Magnets and electrets can do work because inside them energy is stored. When
> a magnet lifts a piece of steel the magnet do work. This work is changed
> into potential energy of the assembly (magnet and the piece).
First off, I'm only talking about magnets. Electrets, given that they
use electric fields, are entirely capable of doing work.
Yes, energy is stored in the fields. However to use your example, when
a magnet lifts a piece of steel, the object doing the work is not the
field but rather the object that prevented the magnet from flying to
the steel. I really am serious when I say the field does no work. All
the work is done by the thing that creates, maintains, or resists the
field.
A good example to test your understanding would be induced emf.
>
> > You will find no supporters here. I can clearly see that you are only
> > here because you are tired of your blog being ignored, and ideas
> > mocked on the free energy boards. You have no background in physics -
> > you cannot counter the simple consequence of Maxwell's equations which
> > govern magnetic and electric fields : magnetic fields do no work.
>
> I have supported him for two days. You did not read my posts.
> S*
Obviously not because I would have remembered correcting your
misconceptions about magnetic fields for two days.
gdew...@gmail.com
It's quite an interesting topic actually. Motivation to dismiss my
invention without analysis is enormous. Logic works like this: There
is the possible, there is the impossible and there is that we don't
know anything about. They can be divided further in known and unknown
factors.
1) the known possible
2) the unknown possible
3) the known impossible
4) the unknown impossible
5) the known "we don't know anything about"
6) the unknown "we don't know anything about"
Things can flow naturally from (5) to (1) but when mistaken for (3) it
will first have to move to the domain of (5). When people disagree
about something neither one of them can assume (3) or (1) at least for
the duration of the discussion. A nr (3) should be easy to show or it
instantly becomes a nr (5). I just know a nr (5) is good physics, even
if it's a universe with zero dimensions. :-)
When the Inductrack's train cars move forward, the magnets in the
Halbach arrays induce currents in the track's coils, which in turn
generate an electromagnetic field that repels the arrays. As long as
the train is moving above a low critical speed of a few kilometers per
hour-a bit faster than walking speed-the Halbach arrays will be
levitated a few centimeters above the track's surface.
http://www.skytran.net/press/sciam02.htm
http://www.matchrockets.com/ether/halbach.html
http://www-sldnt.slac.stanford.edu/nlc/notes/Bowden_Eng/ABC_TechNote-067_2.pdf
This goes under (1) as a real "known to be possible".
Sam Wormley
Word games!
Gaby doesn't understand enough physics and fails to understand that
his so called invention is a real energy loser... The lost energy
is mostly in the form of radiated energy of accelerating magnets
and radiated thermal energy from friction.
There is a reason perpetual motion machines can't work. Learn
some thermodynamics.
gdew...@gmail.com
>
> > This goes under (1) as a real "known to be possible".
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> Word games!
>
> Gaby doesn't understand enough physics and fails to understand that
> his so called invention is a real energy loser...
When the Inductrack's train cars move forward, the magnets in the
Sam Wormley
>
> When the Inductrack's train cars move forward, the magnets in the
> Halbach arrays induce currents in the track's coils, which in turn
> generate an electromagnetic field that repels the arrays. As long as
> the train is moving above a low critical speed of a few kilometers per
> hour-a bit faster than walking speed-the Halbach arrays will be
> levitated a few centimeters above the track's surface.
> http://www.skytran.net/press/sciam02.htm
>
>
Gabby--When the net force on an object (i.e., no force acting on it)
it remains in its state of uniform motion or rest... which is
observer dependent. That what Newton's first law says.
Newton's Second Law (F = ma) applies and in the case cited above the
net force is zero.
When *net* force (such as a block sitting on a kitchen table) is
zero, the block experiences *no* acceleration and retains its state
of motion or rest (rest in the case of our block sitting on, and
with respect to, the kitchen table).
F_net = ma = 0
Newton's Second Law applies
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsSecondLaw.html
The motion of a particle (or train) is described by Euler's
statement of Newton's second law, namely
F = ma
Here F is the applied force, m is the mass of the particle, and a =
dv/dt is the particle's acceleration, with v being the particle's
velocity. This equation, together with the principle that bodies act
symmetrically on one another--so that the force particle A feels
from particle B is equal to the force B feels from A--is the basis
for understanding particle dynamics".
"Newton's [second] law completely describes all the phenomena of
classical mechanics...."
The Ghost In The Machine
<gdew...@gmail.com>
wrote
on 13 Feb 2007 20:58:44 -0800
<1171429124.8...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>:
> On Feb 14, 5:29 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
[snip]
> When the Inductrack's train cars move forward, the magnets in the
> Halbach arrays induce currents in the track's coils, which in turn
> generate an electromagnetic field that repels the arrays. As long as
> the train is moving above a low critical speed of a few kilometers per
> hour-a bit faster than walking speed-the Halbach arrays will be
> levitated a few centimeters above the track's surface.
> http://www.skytran.net/press/sciam02.htm
>
There is something wrong with the diagram, as it is
bilaterally symmetrical; either the up and down magnets
are conical or some such, making the fields asymmetric,
or there is a bar or other such on the top of the Halbach
magnet array -- which makes perfect sense as the train is
primarily steel, presumably.
I don't see why this shouldn't work, though at best it's
a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, and in
reality there are issues such as air friction, eddy
currents, and resistance in the levitation coils.
In short, it won't move on its own; it'll have to be pushed. :-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #992381111:
while(bit&BITMASK) ;
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gdew...@gmail.com
> gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > When the Inductrack's train cars move forward, the magnets in the
> > Halbach arrays induce currents in the track's coils, which in turn
> > generate an electromagnetic field that repels the arrays. As long as
> > the train is moving above a low critical speed of a few kilometers per
> > hour-a bit faster than walking speed-the Halbach arrays will be
> > levitated a few centimeters above the track's surface.
> > http://www.skytran.net/press/sciam02.htm
>
> it remains in its state of uniform motion or rest... which is
> observer dependent. That what Newton's first law says.
yes exactly, and the train doesn't radiate away in any way.
> Newton's Second Law (F = ma) applies and in the case cited above the
> net force is zero.
>
> When *net* force (such as a block sitting on a kitchen table) is
> zero, the block experiences *no* acceleration and retains its state
> of motion or rest (rest in the case of our block sitting on, and
> with respect to, the kitchen table).
>
> F_net = ma = 0
>
> Newton's Second Law applies
> http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsSecondLaw.html
>
> The motion of a particle (or train) is described by Euler's
> statement of Newton's second law, namely
>
> F = ma
>
> Here F is the applied force, m is the mass of the particle, and a =
> dv/dt is the particle's acceleration, with v being the particle's
> velocity. This equation, together with the principle that bodies act
> symmetrically on one another--so that the force particle A feels
> from particle B is equal to the force B feels from A--is the basis
> for understanding particle dynamics".
>
> "Newton's [second] law completely describes all the phenomena of
> classical mechanics...."
So that leads me to believe that an acceleration of (say) 1m/s/s and a
declaration of 1 m/s/s equal a rest position.
pushing a wheel only works forwards and backwards, pushing it
sidewards has no influence on it's rotation.
Besides from gaining a push and a pull for free it's also important
that magnetic interaction is not instantaneous the primary magnet can
be moved away before the balance changes in favor of the pull.
Never the less (when we do allow it to change into a pull) the push
remains unaccounted for.
hanson
news:1171355848.7...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> that he is convinced to save the world, just like the Einstein
>> Dingleberries do... both suffering from that delusion, both
>> sides doing their own semi-profound frame dragging... but
>> not really knowing what they are dragging around and much
>> less what they are saving the world **from** ... like...
>> "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> who wrote:
>>
>> [Gaby]
>> So here I sit with the invention that is going to save the world
>> (people say) and you are going to unmake this with lies? This should
>> obviously put much larger question-marks with your character. :-)
>>
>> [Eric]
>> No, *YOU* say it will save the world. The rest of the world, the tiny
>> tiny part that has even noticed your junk, has rolled its' eyes and
>> moved on... [but you Eric, have not... ahahaha.... ]
>>
>> yes exactly! Isn't this amazing? It looks as if we worship different
>> gods? Lets not defend our religions with blood. We should agree to
>>
>> [hanson]
>> ... Gabi, certainly your sermon here, not necessarily your machine
>> though, has assumed a certain perpetual magnetism. That is good!
>> Now, you must ask Eric and the world to send you money and to
>> become investment partners in/for your work. Your idea of invoking
>> god to promote your goals is indeed a splendid coup, because you
>> see, even physics, being a social enterprise, has deep religious
>> under-tones. ..... ahahahaha... Carry on, dudes. I love your show.
>> ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
... That means Jack shit, Gaby. It's just a computer generated
Julia-Mandelbrot fractal depiction.
>
[Gaby]
> This is not 1800. You didn't study your jetsons properly.
> http://www.cartoon-factory.com/disney/view.cgi?ID=383871&cel=Jetsons,%20Yogi%20&%20Boo-Boo
>
That's is a cute joke, just like your magnet motor.
Good humor, Gaby, You get 3 attaboys for that!
Thanks for the laughs
ahahaha... ahahanson
Ben Newsam
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>As long as
>the train is moving above a low critical speed of a few kilometers per
>hour-a bit faster than walking speed-the Halbach arrays will be
>levitated a few centimeters above the track's surface.
But not for free. Such a device needs to be driven along, and there
will be inductive drag.
Uncle Al
>
> On Feb 13, 8:56 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" <sz.bia...@wp.pl> wrote:
> > "Puppet_Sock" :
> >
> > > Your "magnet motor" is bull.
> >
> > His and another are O.K. Read my posts I have sent for two days.
> > S*
>
> It's quite an interesting topic actually. Motivation to dismiss my
> invention without analysis is enormous. Logic works like this: There
> is the possible, there is the impossible and there is that we don't
> know anything about. They can be divided further in known and unknown
> factors.
Homogeneity of time + Noether's theorem = conservation of mass-energy.
Homogeneity of space + Noether's theorem = conservation of linear
momentum.
Isotropy of space + Noether's theorem = conservation of angular
momentum.
Therefore, perpetual motion machines of the first kind are
impossible. Therefore, perpetual motion machines of the second kind
are impossible unless they are lossless. Friction, electrical
resistance. Therefore, all perpetual motion machines are impossible.
First Law of Thermodynamics: You cannot win
Second Law of Thermodynamics: You cannot break even except on a very
cold day.
Third Law of Thermodynamics: It never ges that cold.
Why don't you configure your idiocy to run at negative temps kelvin
and put forth the corresponding thermodynamic argument? Negative
temps kelvin are no big deal: lasing media, NMR, MRI, EPR... and
adiabatic demagnetization of paramagnetic salts for cryogenic
refrigeration.
Google
"dippy bird" 4,660 hits
"drinking bird" 51,600 hits
google Images
"dippy bird" 76 hits
"drinking bird" 447 hits
Ignorant idiot.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Sam Wormley
Uncle Al doesn't put up with bullshit... for that matter, why should
any of us put up with bullshit. There is plenty of beautiful physics
to share and learn.... benefiting beginners to the most seasoned
practitioners and thinkers.
gdew...@gmail.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bzDvvS3PfE&eurl=
> [Gaby]
> > This is not 1800. You didn't study your jetsons properly.
> >http://www.cartoon-factory.com/disney/view.cgi?ID=383871&cel=Jetsons,...
>
> [hanson]
> That's is a cute joke, just like your magnet motor.
> Good humor, Gaby, You get 3 attaboys for that!
> Thanks for the laughs
> ahahaha... ahahanson
you are also a cute joke. :-)
hanson
>> [Gaby] <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171386071.2...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
news:1171355848.7...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
This is not 1800. You didn't study your jetsons properly.
http://www.cartoon-factory.com/disney/view.cgi?ID=383871&cel=Jetsons,...
>>
[hanson]
That's is a cute joke, just like your magnet motor.
Good humor, Gaby, You get 3 attaboys for that!
Thanks for the laughs
ahahaha... ahahanson
>
you are also a cute joke. :-)
>
[hanson]
AHAHA.. that's a cute come-back actually, but you still
haven't gotten any investors, intellectual nor financial.
Not even with that you-tube link. Haven't you noticed
at all that this is counter-productive for your perpetual
mag-motor?:**The MOVING hand is feeding it energy**
But carry on with your fetish & obsession. Good luck!
ahahaha... ahahahanson
gdew...@gmail.com
> > On Feb 14, 9:29 am, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
> >> [Gaby] <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> [hanson]
> That's is a cute joke, just like your magnet motor.
> Good humor, Gaby, You get 3 attaboys for that!
> Thanks for the laughs
> ahahaha... ahahanson
>
> [Gaby]
>
> [hanson]
> AHAHA.. that's a cute come-back actually, but you still
> haven't gotten any investors, intellectual nor financial.
> Not even with that you-tube link. Haven't you noticed
> at all that this is counter-productive for your perpetual
> mag-motor?:**The MOVING hand is feeding it energy**
> But carry on with your fetish & obsession. Good luck!
> ahahaha... ahahahanson
I don't give jack shit about your capitalist coupon system.
But you are getting owned at your own game?
You whine about photoshop then
I show you a video? haha?
You really got owned there. HA - HA - Hanson?
As for your intellect...well..... it's quite the disappointment. You
have very little of it.
Besides from being right I'm also clearly the most funny quicknet user
here. HAHA^5
Everyone knows you also are Ben, Sam and Eric We all know this! Both
your arguments and your character are as cheap as a free email
address. Your profile defines how uninteresting you are.
"This person has not created a profile."
So, we should treat you like one and the same person from now on -
until you disprove this rock solid theory. Lets see you make your
first argument without dishonesty bensamerichanson.
Call me counter productive - hahaha ha a ah h a a h h a h h h h a a a
a
I even have referrences for this:
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress?p=5723
Ben Newsam
<gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Everyone knows you also are Ben, Sam and Eric We all know this! Both
>your arguments and your character are as cheap as a free email
>address. Your profile defines how uninteresting you are.
>
>"This person has not created a profile."
Do you actually understand how newsgroups work? Most people posting on
usenet do *not* do so via google.
T Wake
"Ben Newsam" <ben.n...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a8t6t21u2b9uk4chn...@4ax.com...
Out of some serendipitous good fortune I seem to have been spared his
original post and only saw it via yours.
I wondered how long before the "you are all the same person" kooksign would
appear, but it is good to see he has added a novel twist and assumed "no
google profile" meant something.
Don't you just LOVE google groups....
hanson
instead of promoting his magnet-motor and his theory in message
news:1171483331.0...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
[hanson]
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/7ce8b7e5042dbd5a
AHAHA.. that's a cute come-back actually, but you still
haven't gotten any investors, intellectual nor financial.
Not even with that you-tube link. Haven't you noticed
at all that this is counter-productive for your perpetual
mag-motor?:**The MOVING hand is feeding it energy**
But carry on with your fetish & obsession. Good luck!
ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
> I don't give jack shit about your capitalist coupon system.
>
ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha.. IOW zero, none, zilch
and nada investors, intellectual nor financial for you... ahahaha...
Besides, Bagy, you begin to sound like a communist enviro shit.
You ought to study the
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/20543afd0304b3f3
----- The green Bible & its enviro Theology that says: -------
= "It doesn't matter what is true ... it only matters what people
= believe is true. -- Paul Watson, Sea Shepard/ex-Greenpeace, &...
= "A lot of environmental [sci/soc/pol] messages are simply not
= accurate. We use hype." -- Jerry Franklin, Ecologist, UoW, and...
= "We make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
= mention of any doubts we may have [about] being honest."
= -- Stephen Schneider (Stanford prof. who first sought fame as
= a global cooler, but has now hit the big time as a global warmer)
and much much more.....
>
[Gaby]
Everyone knows you also are Ben, Sam and Eric
We all know this!
>
What is this "we" shit?... You and your magnet motor which
you have to hand-feed for every turn?.... AHAHAHAHA...
>
[Gaby]
So, we should treat you like one and the same person
from now on - until you disprove this rock solid theory.
Lets see you make your
first argument without dishonesty bensamerichanson.
>
Gaby, unlike you blustering pinko green herd animal,
hanson travels alone and hanson doesn't try to sell a
theory. But hanson, Ben and Sam will laugh at you until
YOU have proven YOUR theory, Gaby. Your cussing at
people doesn't help to achieve your goals... ahahaha...
>
[Gaby][hanson]
So?.... where is the money? ... But hey, come to think of, Gaby.
There may be reprieve, hope and success for you: Pitch your
thing to "TJ Frazir". He is a frequent poster, a higly intellectual
Multibillionaire, your kinda guy, Gaby!... He has similar ideas
like you... and the money to materialize them. Go sic'em, tiger!
ahahaha... ahahahahanson
gdew...@gmail.com
> "Ben Newsam" <ben.new...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:a8t6t21u2b9uk4chn...@4ax.com...
>
> > On 14 Feb 2007 12:02:11 -0800, "gdewi...@gmail.com"
> > <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>Everyone knows you also are Ben, Sam and Eric We all know this! Both
> >>your arguments and your character are as cheap as a free email
> >>address. Your profile defines how uninteresting you are.
>
> >>"This person has not created a profile."
>
> > Do you actually understand how newsgroups work? Most people posting on
> > usenet do *not* do so via google.
The Google Purchase of the 1995-2001 Usenet Archive And the Online
Community
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/7/7013/1.html
hehehe
> Out of some serendipitous good fortune I seem to have been spared his
> original post and only saw it via yours.
ghee, I'm sorry Twake you didn't make it onto the list.
With irrational logic being so accepted nowadays you are probably not
going to find out who wanted to hide the magnet motor from you.
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
Here is the link again, I made the pages for you after all. :-)
> I wondered how long before the "you are all the same person" kooksign would
> appear, but it is good to see he has added a novel twist and assumed "no
> google profile" meant something.
>
> Don't you just LOVE google groups....
I think it's time for a group hug, the love has entirely disappeared.
CLEARLY!!
gdew...@gmail.com
> Gaby <gdewi...@gmail.com> cranked himself grievoulsy over hanson
> instead of promoting his magnet-motor and his theory in messagenews:1171483331.0...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> [hanson]http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/7ce8b7e5042dbd5a
> AHAHA.. that's a cute come-back actually, but you still
> haven't gotten any investors, intellectual nor financial.
> Not even with that you-tube link. Haven't you noticed
> at all that this is counter-productive for your perpetual
> mag-motor?:**The MOVING hand is feeding it energy**
> But carry on with your fetish & obsession. Good luck!
> ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
> [Gaby]
> > I don't give jack shit about your capitalist coupon system.
>
> [hanson]
> ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha.. IOW zero, none, zilch
> and nada investors, intellectual nor financial for you... ahahaha...
> Besides, Bagy, you begin to sound like a communist enviro shit.
> ----- The green Bible & its enviro Theology that says: -------
> = "It doesn't matter what is true ... it only matters what people
> = believe is true. -- Paul Watson, Sea Shepard/ex-Greenpeace, &...
> = "A lot of environmental [sci/soc/pol] messages are simply not
> = accurate. We use hype." -- Jerry Franklin, Ecologist, UoW, and...
> = "We make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
> = mention of any doubts we may have [about] being honest."
> = -- Stephen Schneider (Stanford prof. who first sought fame as
> = a global cooler, but has now hit the big time as a global warmer)
> and much much more.....
>
> [Gaby]
> Everyone knows you also are Ben, Sam and Eric
> We all know this!
> "This person has not created a profile."
>
> [hanson]
> What is this "we" shit?... You and your magnet motor which
> you have to hand-feed for every turn?.... AHAHAHAHA...
You get 1 point for humor here. This sure makes you stand out from the
other trolls. It also means you are fixated and fascinated by the so
much superior jokes I make. I will have to keep a close eye on this
self-induction. Before you know it things like that perpetuate and
explode. So keep your cool and I will teach you ok? :-)
> [Gaby]
> So, we should treat you like one and the same person
> from now on - until you disprove this rock solid theory.
> Lets see you make your
> first argument without dishonesty bensamerichanson.
>
> [hanson]
> Gaby, unlike you blustering pinko green herd animal,
> hanson travels alone and hanson doesn't try to sell a
> theory. But hanson, Ben and Sam will laugh at you until
> YOU have proven YOUR theory, Gaby. Your cussing at
> people doesn't help to achieve your goals... ahahaha...
You again make a rational point, this is something I haven't seen your
other accounts do. Of-course this is not hard to fake.
> [Gaby]
> I even have references for this:http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress?p=5723
>
> [hanson]
> So?.... where is the money? ... But hey, come to think of, Gaby.
> There may be reprieve, hope and success for you: Pitch your
> thing to "TJ Frazir". He is a frequent poster, a higly intellectual
> Multibillionaire, your kinda guy, Gaby!... He has similar ideas
> like you... and the money to materialize them. Go sic'em, tiger!
> ahahaha... ahahahahanson
More coupon physics? I have destroyed the laws of physics, I can
imagine you are very upset now.... Please don't take it so personal?
Imagine all the medals officials could award you for writing a paper
about this?
There are 3 phenomenon of free energy in this apparatus! That's like a
pmm ppm with 2 bonus energy sources. Mechanically it doesn't get any
better as this as I've studied hundreds of different designs. They are
all based on this fundamental new law *evil grin*
Besides those 3 facts we have the 4th fact that A theory doesn't have
to be real to work.
Your E/MCC is the big prove of that.
You try make it sound like big objects drop faster. aka the "We Say
So" company.
ghehehehe
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-coil
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-development
The inter is not equal to the action and the shit is not bull.
You have to look from the outside in not from the inside out.
Everything you think "is" could B something else.
Now I'm done apologizing for being smarter as you.
gdew...@gmail.com
news:0AiAh.275549$aJ.51321@attbi_s21...
I am so desperate to avoid the fact that my life has been a total waste of
resources that I will keep making stoopid arguments in favor of my invention
until the end of time!
nons...@unsettled.com
He's apparently a refugee from Yahoo Groups.
gdew...@gmail.com
> "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
>
> news:0AiAh.275549$aJ.51321@attbi_s21...
>
> > gdewi...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > So here I sit with the invention that is going to save the world
> > > (people say) and you are going to unmake this with lies? This should
> > > obviously put much larger question-marks with your character. :-)
>
> > You seem to feel threatened, Gaby. And you seem to have the
> > used buggy whip salesman's gift for the Gab... but you can't
> > fool mother nature.
>
> > There is a reason perpetual motion machines can't work. Learn
> > thermodynamics...
>
> I am so desperate to avoid the fact that my life has been a total waste of
> resources that I will keep making stoopid arguments in favor of my invention
> until the end of time!
good point.
T Wake
<nons...@unsettled.com> wrote in message
news:a865$45d397fd$cdd084fb$24...@DIALUPUSA.NET...
Sadly, probably true.
RichD
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> Homogeneity of time plus Noether's theorem - conservation of
> mass-energy.
What means 'homogeneity of time'? What would 'non-homogeneous
time' look like?
> Homogeneity of space plus Noether's theorem - conservation of linear
> momentum.
ditto
--
Rich
gdew...@gmail.com
> On Feb 9, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
>
> > >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
>
> > Homogeneity of time plus Noether's theorem - conservation of
> > mass-energy.
>
> What means 'homogeneity of time'? What would 'non-homogeneous
> time' look like?
I'm pretty sure thoughts manifest themselves forwards and backwards in
time.
> > Homogeneity of space plus Noether's theorem - conservation of linear
> > momentum.
The rest position is in rotation, it should always go back to it's
most stable point. It should speed up until the magnets stop
interacting by lack of available time units, then the torque goes up
with the load as it make it spin slower enough.
Emmy Noether is a most interesting woman.
Thanks for digging her up Al, even tho you are wrong. :-)
Uncle Al
Your ignorance isn't our problem. The universe is self-consistent.
Homogeneity of time, homogeneity and isotropy of space make it
happen. Physical law is universally true (singularities excepted...
but they are hidden behind event horizons). Get a dictionary.
http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/
"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to
brighten it everywhere, " Isaac Asimov.
The contrapositive is also true, as has been repeatedly and
devastatingly demonstrated throughout history. The Roman Colosseum is
poured concrete. Roman concrete was as common as dirt. The first
concrete pour after the fall of Rome waited 1330 years. Yaweh's
infinite knowledge must have been busy elsewhere.
Sam Wormley
>
> The Google Purchase of the 1995-2001 Usenet Archive And the Online
> Community
> http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/7/7013/1.html
>
> hehehe
>
USENET is distributed all over the world... it's not owned by
any one entity.
Sam Wormley
>
> The Google Purchase of the 1995-2001 Usenet Archive And the Online
> Community
> http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/7/7013/1.html
>
> hehehe
Technical details
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Technical_details
Usenet is a set of protocols for generating, storing and retrieving
news "articles" (which resemble Internet mail messages) and for
exchanging them among a readership which is potentially widely
distributed. These protocols most commonly use a flooding algorithm
which propagates copies throughout a network of participating servers.
Whenever a message reaches a server, that server forwards the message
to all its network neighbors that haven't yet seen the article. Only
one copy of a message is stored per server, and each server makes it
available on demand to the (typically local) readers able to access
that server. Usenet was thus one of the first peer-to-peer
applications, although in this case the "peers" are themselves servers
that the users then access, rather than the users themselves being
peers on the network.
RFC 850 was the first formal specification of the messages exchanged by
Usenet servers. It was superseded by RFC 1036.
One difference between Usenet and newer peer-to-peer applications is
that one can request the automated removal of a posting from the whole
network by creating a cancel message, although due to a lack of
authentication and resultant abuse, this capability is frequently
disabled. Copyright holders may still request the manual deletion of
infringing material using the provisions of World Intellectual Property
Organization treaty implementations, such as the U.S. Online Copyright
Infringement Liability Limitation Act.
On the Internet, Usenet is typically on TCP Port 119.
gdew...@gmail.com
> Hello, I had this wonderful idea for a permanent magnet motor but now
> I think I've found real proof.
>
> I obviously need professional help.
>
> Please, share your thoughts....
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor
I've added the following 2 pages:
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-coil
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-development
Still working at the construction drawings...
hanson
news:1171492084.9...@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
one single sentence that's worth mentioning as it highlights his mentation:
>
[Baggy]
> I have destroyed the laws of physics
>
[hanson]
Impressive, Baggy... ahahaha... but if so, then how come you can
still read this?
Take care of yourself, your magnet motor and all those broken laws.
Ciao, ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/26345042b228b7eb
gdew...@gmail.com
> <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 11, 10:48 am, Ben Newsam <ben.new...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On 10 Feb 2007 16:29:50 -0800, "gdewi...@gmail.com"
>
> > > <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >Because the magnet we move is both attracted and repelled in
> > > >relatively equal amounts it can move with very little resistance true
> > > >the field of the secondary magnet.
>
> > > >Can we talk about this?
>
> > > >Do you allow a discussion about this?
>
> > > You can cause it to rotate. So?
> > So ...
>
> > 90 degrees - force on primary magnet is zero
>
> > The work OUT of the system is the sum of repulsion and
> > attraction.
>
> > 95 degrees - attractive force on primary magnet is now bigger as the
> > repulsive force.
>
> > The work that goes IN is the subtraction of repulsion from
> > attraction.
>
> > simple.
>
> I would have accepted the unanimous verdict that you must accept the premise
> that you are stupider than shit since you can't prove otherwise, except for
> the fact that I built your motor and it works!
>
> Now please tell me how to turn the bloody thing off.
>
> Keep up the good work,
> Simon.
gdew...@gmail.com
gdew...@gmail.com
> Gaby, the Baggy Lawbreaker <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1171492084.9...@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> one single sentence that's worth mentioning as it highlights his mentation:
>
>
>
> [Baggy]
> > I have destroyed the laws of physics
>
> [hanson]
> Impressive, Baggy... ahahaha... but if so, then how come you can
> still read this?
> Take care of yourself, your magnet motor and all those broken laws.
> Ciao, ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/26345042b228b7eb
RichD
> > > Homogeneity of time plus Noether's theorem - conservation of
> > > mass-energy.
>
> > What means 'homogeneity of time'? What would 'non-homogeneous
> > time' look like?
>
> > > Homogeneity of space plus Noether's theorem - conservation of linear
> > > momentum.
>
> > ditto
>
> Your ignorance isn't our problem. The universe is self-consistent.
> Homogeneity of time, homogeneity and isotropy of space make it
> happen.
In other words, you don't know, but your eggshell ego and mental
flatulence won't permit you to admit it. "Google it" is the new
dodge... damn you are clever, Professor.
OK Unc, let's. Because Google contains ALL THE ANSWERS!
I typed "homogeneity of time" into Google, which returned the
following links... let's have a look see, yes/no?
Testing Homogeneity of Time-Continuous Rating Transitions
"Banks could achieve substantial improvements in their
portfolio credit risk by estimating rating transition matrices
within a time-continuous Markov model..."
O.S.Razumovsky. Models of Time in Physics and Cosmology
"There exist two interconnected problems in philosophy:
physics and cosmology. We have essence of time, and modelling
of time. The latter is connected with the application of computers...
>From this there appears an opportunity to make the abstraction
of "homogeneity of time". An observer fixed this homogeneity,
as well as the absence of chaotic and non-rythmical deviations
from a given density of states, and introduces by means of
abstract thinking the notion of a "clock" as a standard of
homogeneity of a process. He introduces also the abstraction
of "time moment". So an observer comes to the general notion
of time through the notions of homogeneity of a process."
Postulates of the theoretical psychology
"The modern physical theory of space and time (a special
relativity theory) is a part of the physical world picture...
The physical world picture is a derivative from the psychical
world picture, at least because of the fact that is corresponds
the human cognitive requirement. All the world pictures
(physical, informative and other ones) are from the psychical
office.. Let this science research homogeneous times,
isotropy times, homogenous spaces and isotropy spaces...
Every person is his (or her) own coordinate system. There
are more than 6 000000000 such coordinate systems on
the Earth... So, there are 6 000000000 non-inertial
coordinate systems before the natural sciences, and
their movements don't depend on each other."
LMAO! Thanks, Google! Thanks, Unc!
In fact, no one on this board knows what this homogeneity crap
means, or Noether's theorem, but they won't admit it... anybody
remember the fable of the Emperor's Clothes?
> Physical law is universally true.
And you know this how?
Never mind, rhetorical question.
Uncle Al wrote:
> Your ignorance isn't our problem.
I just had to see that in print again.
PS You pompous twit.
--
Rich
Androcles
"RichD" <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1171765288.4...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Hahaha!
Schwartz wrote:
news:45C399C4...@hate.spam.net...
> Newtonian physics is infinite lightspeed (instantaneous knowledge of
> all aspects of a system),
Because Schwartz has never heard of ROEMER, DOPPLER,
MICHELSON or SAGNAC.
Schwartz wrote:
> Your ignorance isn't our problem.
I just had to see that in print again.
He's not just a pompous twit, he's a fully fledged arrogant ignorant fuckhead.
Eric Gisse
> On Feb 14, Uncle Al (the kiddies' pal) wrote:
>
> > > > Homogeneity of time plus Noether's theorem - conservation of
> > > > mass-energy.
>
> > > What means 'homogeneity of time'? What would 'non-homogeneous
> > > time' look like?
>
> > > > Homogeneity of space plus Noether's theorem - conservation of linear
> > > > momentum.
>
> > > ditto
>
> > Your ignorance isn't our problem. The universe is self-consistent.
> > Homogeneity of time, homogeneity and isotropy of space make it
> > happen.
> >http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/
>
> In other words, you don't know, but your eggshell ego and mental
> flatulence won't permit you to admit it. "Google it" is the new
> dodge... damn you are clever, Professor.
>
> OK Unc, let's. Because Google contains ALL THE ANSWERS!
>
> I typed "homogeneity of time" into Google, which returned the
> following links... let's have a look see, yes/no?
You could have tried looking up "homogeneous" in the dictionary rather
than creating a public display of idiocy.
[...]
>
> In fact, no one on this board knows what this homogeneity crap
> means, or Noether's theorem, but they won't admit it... anybody
> remember the fable of the Emperor's Clothes?
Ignorance is bliss, especially when you imagine everyone else is
enjoying it.
Noether's theorem approximately means that every symmetry buys you a
conserved quantity.
Uncle Al
gdew...@gmail.com
> In fact, no one on this board knows what this homogeneity crap
> means, or Noether's theorem, but they won't admit it... anybody
> remember the fable of the Emperor's Clothes?
homogeneity It's when things are mixed up well.
Like the next step after dissolving. :-)
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-it-cant-be
Sam Wormley
RichD
> > > > > Homogeneity of time plus Noether's theorem - conservation of
> > > > > mass-energy.
>
> > > > What means 'homogeneity of time'? What would 'non-homogeneous
> > > > time' look like?
>
> > > > > Homogeneity of space plus Noether's theorem - conservation of linear
> > > > > momentum.
>
> > > > ditto
>
> > > Your ignorance isn't our problem. The universe is self-consistent.
> > > Homogeneity of time, homogeneity and isotropy of space make it
> > > happen.
> > >http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/
>
> > In other words, you don't know, but your eggshell ego and mental
> > flatulence won't permit you to admit it. "Google it" is the new
> > dodge... damn you are clever, Professor.
>
> > OK Unc, let's. Because Google contains ALL THE ANSWERS!
>
> > I typed "homogeneity of time" into Google, which returned the
> > following links... let's have a look see, yes/no?
>
> You could have tried looking up "homogeneous" in the dictionary rather
> than creating a public display of idiocy.
> [...]
By golly, I never thaut of that, Perfessor! Gud thing your here.
All right, I'll look it up... in which dictionary, again? Of
course,
"the" dictionary, what a dumb question... good old American
Heritage...
1. Of the same or similar nature or kind: "a tight-knit,
homogeneous society"
Well sure, time is of the same or similar nature! How
perspicuous, who could argue with that?
Or perhaps...
2. Uniform in structure or composition throughout
Time is uniform is structure! How insightful! I mean,
EVERYONE knows its structure, and the fact it's uniform,
because of those famous uniform vs. non-uniform structure
experiments (and if you don't know, GOOGLE IT! sheesh,
you expect me to do all your work for you?)
Or maybe...
3. Mathematics: Consisting of terms of the same degree or elements
of the same dimension
Time consists of terms or elements of the same dimension!
(because it's always measured in seconds) How obvious!
Which of course splains all about 'homogeneity of time' and
symmetry and mass-energy conservation.
Thanks, Professors Schwartz & Gisse! By Dog, what an
honor, to associate with such smaht people like them, who
know it all, and can answer any question, by saying "Google it"
and "look it up in the dictionary" (THE dictionary, that is).
> > In fact, no one on this board knows what this homogeneity crap
> > means, or Noether's theorem, but they won't admit it... anybody
> > remember the fable of the Emperor's Clothes?
>
> Ignorance is bliss, especially when you imagine everyone else is
> enjoying it.
> Noether's theorem approximately means that every symmetry buys you a
> conserved quantity.
oh
And, in the the definitions of homogeneous, 'symmetry' is
mentioned...
darn, can't find it... note to self: get new spectacles
prescription...
On Feb 17, "Eric Gisse" wrote:
> You could have tried looking up "homogeneous" in the dictionary rather
> than creating a public display of idiocy.
I just had to see that in print again.
PS Can anybody loan me a copy of "The Emperor's Clothes"?
I never tire of that fable...
--
Rich
Androcles
"RichD" <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1172188924.9...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
Sure.
http://www.taletown.com/emporer.html
You do realise the yarn is mainly about the fuckheads who
adore emporers?