Edison is the father of electronics
Kenneth McKenzie
demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
The site also provides a glimpse of the future with unrestricted technology.
The Radia Reciprocating Rotary Engine has one moving part and completes ten
power strokes every piston revolution. It can be seen on the KSS Site at
www.khwarzimic.org/takveen It is in pdf files that require
Acrobat Reader which can be freely downloaded at www.adobe.com
The site information will be changed in the near future to depict the
prototype now
being developed with all the sealing techniques incorporated in the rotary
piston. The same
principles as the wankel except we are using high temperature carbon with a
double seal on the apex.
The design now being prototyped has only carbon to metal contact and should
not require lubricating oil to operate. Photo's and information about it
will be
submitted to the KSS in the next short while.
Enjoy
Ken McKenzie
Ten...@home.com
William L. Bahn
You used to claim 50 power strokes per revolution. But then again, you used
to also claim to have a working permanent magnet engine that needed no power
input to operate.
Kenneth McKenzie wrote in message
<8SfS4.223715$Dv1.2...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>...
Peter Russell
So I suppose James Clarke Maxwell, Hienrich Hertz, Edouard Branly, Oliver
Joseph Lodge, Guglielmo Marconi, Karl Ferdinand Braun, Reginald Aubrey
Fessenden, Owen Willens Richardson, John Ambrose Fleming (invented the valve
or "tube"), Lee De Forest (invented the triode) and Edwin Howard Armstrong
had little or nothing to do with it then?
If I had to choose a "Father of ELECTRONICS", I think Lee De Forest has the
strongest case.
--
--
---
PeteR
Somewhere in Debyshire, England.
P.S. Visit Brian Long's Clock site at
http://www.hickoryclock.co.uk
or my Derbyshire tourist info site at
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~prlf/derbyshi.htm
Kenneth McKenzie <ten...@home.com> wrote in message
news:8SfS4.223715$Dv1.2...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com...
Bob Myers
>demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
While Edison certainly was a driving force behind the
"electrification" of the world, I think a few other names
come to mind when thinking specifically of "electronics".
For just one example, the "Edison effect" was certainly
an interesting curiousity - but it took Lee DeForest to do
something useful with it.
And let's not forget that Edison was very firmly on the
wrong side in a couple of major issues having to do with
the development of electrical power distribution -
notably the DC vs. AC battle between Edison and
Westinghouse.
Don't get me wrong - Edison was most definitely
one of the greatest inventors of the modern era.
But I get a little disturbed when people try to build
the pedestals of any of these people too high - as
in the attempted near-deification of Tesla by many
of his more rabid fans.
Bob M.
Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879
by "Kenneth McKenzie" <ten...@home.com>:
> There is information on the Khwarzimic Science Society site that
> demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
However, it is demonstrably true that Samuel Morse was the father of
digital electronics. So whatever Khwarzimic Science is, it seems to
be of limited perfection.
Doug Jones
jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
Peter Russell
demonstrate to us that Morse was the father of digital electronics then.
(sits back, this should be good)
--
--
---
PeteR
Somewhere in Debyshire, England.
P.S. Visit Brian Long's Clock site at
http://www.hickoryclock.co.uk
or my Derbyshire tourist info site at
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~prlf/derbyshi.htm
Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879 <jo...@cs.uiowa.edu> wrote
in message news:8fcce4$f10$1...@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu...
Gordon McComb
>
> Go on then Doug,
>
> demonstrate to us that Morse was the father of digital electronics then.
More correctly binary, IMO. Dots and dashes, same as zeros and ones.
Morse Code (three bit) began Baudot (five bit). Baudot began ASCII
(seven or eight bit). Etc, etc. I'm not sure if this is what Doug meant,
though.
I concur with you in your other message that Lee De Forest ought to have
the title as the "father of electronics."
-- Gordon
Gordon McComb
>
> Morse Code (three bit) ....
Before I get whacked, I should say "Morse Code (three to five bit)."
-- Gordon
Ben Franchuk
Now Edison did do a lot with the telegraph ( Morse Code )
and DC power.
Would that make him the "GOD FATHER" ( play the theme from the movie
here )
of Electronics.
--
"We do not inherit our time on this planet from our parents...
We borrow it from our children."
"Ancient Logic" http://www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/al/index.html
William L. Bahn
also have spaces of variable length. If you want to describe it as binary,
you pretty much have to say that your two states are blank and dit with a
dah being two (or more) dits in succession, the same with the blanks between
dits and dahs, between letters and between words.
Gordon McComb wrote in message <3919E4...@gmccomb.com>...
Kevin Aylward
"Bob Myers" <bmy...@hp.com> wrote in message
news:8fca1j$js6$1...@fcnews.fc.hp.com...
> >demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
>
> "electrification" of the world, I think a few other names
> come to mind when thinking specifically of "electronics".
> For just one example, the "Edison effect" was certainly
> an interesting curiousity - but it took Lee DeForest to do
> something useful with it.
>
> And let's not forget that Edison was very firmly on the
> wrong side in a couple of major issues having to do with
> the development of electrical power distribution -
> notably the DC vs. AC battle between Edison and
> Westinghouse.
>
> Don't get me wrong - Edison was most definitely
> one of the greatest inventors of the modern era.
> But I get a little disturbed when people try to build
> the pedestals of any of these people too high - as
> in the attempted near-deification of Tesla by many
> of his more rabid fans.
>
>
> Bob M.
>
My understanding is that Edison was more of business man, with large numbers
of slaves that done the real work, but took the all the credit for this work
himself.
Kevin Aylward , Warden of the Kings Ale
ke...@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - a currently free GUI xspice mixed-mode Windows
simulator with Schematic Capture and waveform display
>
Steve Spence
--
--
Steve Spence
Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.com
Palm Pilot Pages - http://www.webconx.com/palm
X10 Home Automation - http://www.webconx.com/x10
ssp...@webconx.com
(212) 894-3704 x3154 - voicemail/fax
If we don't believe in freedom of speech
for people who we disagree with, we don't believe in it at all.
--
"Peter Russell" <pr...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8fck5a$6ga$1...@gxsn.com...
> Go on then Doug,
>
> demonstrate to us that Morse was the father of digital electronics then.
>
> (sits back, this should be good)
>
> --
> --
> ---
> PeteR
> Somewhere in Debyshire, England.
>
> P.S. Visit Brian Long's Clock site at
> http://www.hickoryclock.co.uk
> or my Derbyshire tourist info site at
> http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~prlf/derbyshi.htm
> Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879 <jo...@cs.uiowa.edu> wrote
> in message news:8fcce4$f10$1...@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu...
> > From article <8SfS4.223715$Dv1.2...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > by "Kenneth McKenzie" <ten...@home.com>:
> >
> > > There is information on the Khwarzimic Science Society site that
> > > demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
> >
Steve Spence
--
--
Steve Spence
Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.com
Palm Pilot Pages - http://www.webconx.com/palm
X10 Home Automation - http://www.webconx.com/x10
ssp...@webconx.com
(212) 894-3704 x3154 - voicemail/fax
If we don't believe in freedom of speech
for people who we disagree with, we don't believe in it at all.
--
"William L. Bahn" <wb...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:shjue23...@corp.supernews.com...
> Morse Code is more complicated than binary - you have dits and dahs but
you
> also have spaces of variable length. If you want to describe it as binary,
> you pretty much have to say that your two states are blank and dit with a
> dah being two (or more) dits in succession, the same with the blanks
between
> dits and dahs, between letters and between words.
>
>
> Gordon McComb wrote in message <3919E4...@gmccomb.com>...
> >Peter Russell wrote:
> >>
> >> Go on then Doug,
> >>
> >> demonstrate to us that Morse was the father of digital electronics
then.
> >
Rusty
Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) wrote:
>From article <8SfS4.223715$Dv1.2...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
>by "Kenneth McKenzie" <ten...@home.com>:
>
>> There is information on the Khwarzimic Science Society site that
>> demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
>
>However, it is demonstrably true that Samuel Morse was the father of
>digital electronics. So whatever Khwarzimic Science is, it seems to
>be of limited perfection.
>
> Doug Jones
> jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
Why do you guys humour this twit McKenzie? Just let it die and
perhaps he will go away.
Fred Kasner
Ever hear of Morse code? Digital signals if ever there was.
FK
Peter Russell wrote:
>
> Go on then Doug,
>
> demonstrate to us that Morse was the father of digital electronics then.
>
> (sits back, this should be good)
>
> --
> --
> ---
> PeteR
> Somewhere in Debyshire, England.
>
> P.S. Visit Brian Long's Clock site at
> http://www.hickoryclock.co.uk
> or my Derbyshire tourist info site at
> http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~prlf/derbyshi.htm
> Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879 <jo...@cs.uiowa.edu> wrote
> in message news:8fcce4$f10$1...@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu...
Spehro Pefhany
> dit dah dah dit ;-) looks binary to me.
It's compressed too (the most common letters in English have the fewest
dits and dahs).
Best regards,
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Contributions invited->The AVR-gcc FAQ is at: http://www.BlueCollarLinux.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
William L. Bahn
Steve Spence wrote in message ...
>dit dah dah dit ;-) looks binary to me.
Well, since it's binary, and you have already taken care of the two possible
states (dit and dah) then the meaning of this fragment should be
unambiguous. So it it:
.__. P
. _ _ . ETTE or E T T E , E T TE, E TT E, E TTE, ET T E, ET TE, ETT E
. _ _. ETN or E T N, ET N, E TN
. __ . EME or E M E, E ME, EM E
. __. EG or E G
._ _ . ATE or A T E, A TE, AT E
._ _. AN or A N
.__ . WE or W E
So there are at least 27 interpretations - doesn't look like binary desribes
it too well.
>
>--
>--
>Steve Spence
>Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.com
>Palm Pilot Pages - http://www.webconx.com/palm
>X10 Home Automation - http://www.webconx.com/x10
>ssp...@webconx.com
>(212) 894-3704 x3154 - voicemail/fax
>If we don't believe in freedom of speech
>for people who we disagree with, we don't believe in it at all.
>--
>
>"Peter Russell" <pr...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:8fck5a$6ga$1...@gxsn.com...
Bob Myers
Fred Kasner wrote in message <3919E71D...@enteract.com>...
>You must be easy as hell to be set up to have your leg pulled.
>
>Ever hear of Morse code? Digital signals if ever there was.
Oh, good. NOW we get to have the "what is digital?"
debate all over again....:-)
Bob M.
Peter Russell
Interesting discussion despite being started by Kenneth, who, I take it, has
a certain reputation......
I went to the site Kenneth but could not get all the links to work.
Clearly William L Bahn has a better understanding of Morse code than most.
It is certainly not binary as any amateur radio operator should be able to
tell you.
But digital electronics is not only about binary code, binary was (probably)
invented by mathematicians working on number theory way before anyone used
it in electronics or digital communications. Anyone know who did invent it?
(I think you will find that the INCA's invented a non-decimal numbering
system too, this might have been base 8 (octal)(?))
For me digital electronics started with the digital computers and I wonder
who invented the logic circuits such as the Boolean gates, Half Adders, etc
that are necessary to perform arithmetic.
--
--
---
73
John Woodgate
inimitably wrote:
>Well, since it's binary, and you have already taken care of the two possible
>states (dit and dah) then the meaning of this fragment should be
>unambiguous. So it it:
Morse is not pure binary: it is binary-based. The 'bit' is the 'dit' and
a pause between symbols is a 'no bit'. A 'dah' is three bits '111' and a
space is '000'.
The symbology in the original was corrupt so I reproduce it again:
.--. = P. That's 10111011101: more bits than ASCII needs! (But ASCII
needs 8 bits for 'E' as well.)
. -- . = EME. That's 100011101110001.
and all the others give unique binary sequences. Byte length is not
constant in Morse.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. Phone +44 (0)1268 747839
Fax +44 (0)1268 777124. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk I wanted to make a fully-
automated nuclear-powered trawler,but it went into spontaneous fishing.
PLEASE do not mail copies of newsgroup posts to me.
tel...@xenon.triode.net.au
> Peter Russell wrote:
>>
>> Go on then Doug,
>>
>> demonstrate to us that Morse was the father of digital electronics then.
> More correctly binary, IMO. Dots and dashes, same as zeros and ones.
> Morse Code (three bit)
Morse is not a binary code it is a ternary code because you have
dots, dashes and gaps.
Anyhow, George Bool was the father of digital electronics.
- Tel
Kirk Gordon
I found it a bit strange. As far as Edison as the father of
electronics, I think that's sorta narrow-minded. Don't Galvani, Ohm,
Faraday, Maxwell, or the folks who invented the transistor, get any
credit? And what about Akio Morita or Nolan Bushnell? Don't they get
credit for the proliferation of consumer electronics, and for
precipitating the development of economies of scale that promoted the
real, widespread use of electronics in everyday life?
Kirk Gordon
http://www.gordon-eng.com
Kirk Gordon
Seems to me that Morse is a binary code, since it has only two
possible digits. Dit or dot (short signal), and dash (long signal).
All the characters are formed as combinations of these. The pauses
between bits and characters, I think, aren't additional information as
much as they're just frequency or synchronization indicators, like the
baud rate.
Kirk Gordon
http://www.gordon-eng.com
Kirk Gordon
will settle this argument, and claim that HE invented electronics.
KG
Bob Myers
Kirk Gordon wrote in message <391C1735...@gordon-eng.com>...
> Hmmm... Not that it's all that important, but...
>
> Seems to me that Morse is a binary code, since it has only two
>possible digits. Dit or dot (short signal), and dash (long signal).
>All the characters are formed as combinations of these. The pauses
>between bits and characters, I think, aren't additional information as
>much as they're just frequency or synchronization indicators, like the
>baud rate.
I don't think that it's all that important either, but since it IS a
somewhat
slow Friday morning ahead of a killer week.....:-)
Morse (or actually, "International" code, if you mean that string of
beeps that you hear on the radio) would be "binary" not in the
sense that it has dots and dashes, but that the signal at any given
moment can be in one of only two permissible states - on or off.
A "dash" is simply a longer on state, and in fact is defined as being
three times the length of the "on" time for the "dot". The off times,
either between dots/dashes within a character, between characters,
or between words, are similarly defined in terms of the fundamental
"dot" time. (True "Morse" code, the sort the early railroad
telegraphers used, relied even more on the "off" times, since it
wasn't sent as variable-length beeps - it was clicks and spaces.)
I would claim that Morse/International IS digital, via definitions
presented earlier. (Again, let the digital wars begin anew! :-))
Bob M.
George Jefferson
:presented earlier. (Again, let the digital wars begin anew! :-))
we could probably argue that indian smoke signals were binary as well..<g>
--
george jefferson : geo...@sol1.lrsm.upenn.edu
to reply simply press "r"
-- I hate editing addresses more than I hate the spam!
Mark Kinsler
>I found it a bit strange.
I think the story is that a group of Islamic science people--Pakistani, I
believe, but I'm not sure--wanted to revive the old tradition of Islamic
science. The Islamic scientists inherited the old Greek and Roman science
traditions and kept them alive through the Middle Ages.
But the folks on this website decided to allow anyone and everyone to
publish. Lots of Internet journals have made this mistake: the ESD
Journal, which is devoted to electrostatic phenomena, has published some
thoroughly phony stuff lately.
>As far as Edison as the father of
>electronics, I think that's sorta narrow-minded. Don't Galvani, Ohm,
>Faraday, Maxwell, or the folks who invented the transistor, get any
>credit? And what about Akio Morita or Nolan Bushnell? Don't they get
>credit for the proliferation of consumer electronics, and for
>precipitating the development of economies of scale that promoted the
>real, widespread use of electronics in everyday life?
In the great scheme of things, Edison is more of an electronics person
than you'd realize, though he did it without electronics. He invented the
microphone, the phonograph, the movie projector and movie-making, did a
lot of work with telegraph multiplexing (time-division multiplexing,
actually) and lots of other minor stuff. All were pretty much
electromechanical, the only active devices being relays.
Once people were aware that such things could be done, they came up with
electronic solutions for them, like the audio amplifier that so improved
the telephone and phonograph. In this respect, you can think of Edison's
work as having expanded people's minds, showing them what could be
done with electricity and imagination. He also invented the modern
research lab to speed the process along.
Edison himself was quick to admit that he missed the boat when it came to
radio, amplification, and the initial electronics boom. My suspicion is
that he didn't understand electromagnetic wave theory and was somewhat
scared of the mathematics involved.
M Kinsler
--
............................................................................
114 Columbia Ave. Athens, Ohio USA 45701 voice740.594.3737 fax740.592.3059
Home of the "How Things Work" engineering education program.
See http://www.frognet.net/~kinsler
Kirk Gordon
>
> we could probably argue that indian smoke signals were binary as well..<g>
>
"Chief Big Eagle say 'Hex-coded buffalo count to be transmitted 2.4K
Seconds after local sunrise at Bear Mountain. Bit-rate based on
wind-velocity. Synch-sequence to precede body of message'. Me send
answer by smoke, grandfather? Or should I just fax it?"
Rich Grise
of the information:
dah-dah-di-dit, dah-dah-di-dah is CQ, but
dah, dah-di-di-dah, dah-di-dah is TXK, and
dah-dah, di-dit, dah-dah, di-dah is MIMA.
I'm pretty sure these are accurate, but it's been 40 years, and I
had to have my buddy cheat just to pass the 5 WPM code test.
Cheers!
Rich
Kirk Gordon wrote:
>
> Hmmm... Not that it's all that important, but...
>
> Seems to me that Morse is a binary code, since it has only two
> possible digits. Dit or dot (short signal), and dash (long signal).
> All the characters are formed as combinations of these. The pauses
> between bits and characters, I think, aren't additional information as
> much as they're just frequency or synchronization indicators, like the
> baud rate.
>
Rich Grise
I'd say, he was the inventor of Boolean algebra, yes, but it was
Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley, and some unnamed grunts at Motorola
and Texas Instruments who really escorted in the digital age.
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
Technically, I think I could say that my bedroom light is
"digital," or "binary" (now _there's_ a debate a-brewin'!)
because it's either "on" or "off."
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
...
> Why do you guys humour this twit McKenzie? Just let it die and
> perhaps he will go away.
Because we're electronics geeks, and this is as close to fun as
most of us get most of the time!
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
>
> Hello,
>
> Interesting discussion despite being started by Kenneth, who, I take it, has
> a certain reputation......
> I went to the site Kenneth but could not get all the links to work.
>
> Clearly William L Bahn has a better understanding of Morse code than most.
> It is certainly not binary as any amateur radio operator should be able to
> tell you.
I only claim the binaryness because it has two states - "on" or "off."
Now,
the timing of the "on" and "off" times is, obviously part of the
information
being transmitted. Maybe we could have a big philosophical discussion
about
whether that makes it no longer "binary" or "digital." The coding we're
talking about could probably be called (and I think has been for some
time)
"Morse." And it has an "analog-ness" about it (I just made that word
up),
in that one compares on and off times, and figures out which letter has
been sent, based on the results of that comparison. But, given that,
then
digital computers could be considerd "analog" devices because they make
comparisons all the time - just comparisons of binary numbers. :-)
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
Thanks! :-}
Rich
Robert Grizzard
> Oh, the pauses between bits and characters are most certainly a part
> of the information:
> dah-dah-di-dit, dah-dah-di-dah is CQ, but
ZQ
Other than that you're right.
de kg7yy
--
7:16pm up 3:33, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.04
Sic transit discus mundi
-- From the System Administrator's Guide, by Lars Wirzenius
William L. Bahn
with the claim that it is binary. It is when people say that the two states
are "dit" and "dah" that I have a problem with the claim.
Rich Grise wrote in message <391DD1E0...@vel.net>...
John Woodgate
wrote:
>Peter Russell wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Interesting discussion despite being started by Kenneth, who, I take it, has
>> a certain reputation......
>
>> I went to the site Kenneth but could not get all the links to work.
>>
>> Clearly William L Bahn has a better understanding of Morse code than most.
>> It is certainly not binary as any amateur radio operator should be able to
>> tell you.
>
>I only claim the binaryness because it has two states - "on" or "off."
>Now,
>the timing of the "on" and "off" times is, obviously part of the
>information
>being transmitted. Maybe we could have a big philosophical discussion
>about
>whether that makes it no longer "binary" or "digital." The coding we're
>talking about could probably be called (and I think has been for some
>time)
>"Morse." And it has an "analog-ness" about it (I just made that word
>up),
>in that one compares on and off times, and figures out which letter has
>been sent, based on the results of that comparison.
Look at it this way. There is a fundamental time unit, the duration of a
dit, which is equal to the duration of an intersymbol space. A dah is
three contiguous dits, making this an NRZ type of coding. You can write
each Morse character as a unique binary number, which demonstrates that
they are mathematically equivalent. For example, - . - is 111010111. The
space between characters is 000 and that between words is 00000.
> But, given that,
>then
>digital computers could be considerd "analog" devices because they make
>comparisons all the time - just comparisons of binary numbers. :-)
I don't see how comparing things is an analogue operation.
Roger Johansson
>As long as you say that the two states are "on" or "off" I have no problem
>with the claim that it is binary. It is when people say that the two states
>are "dit" and "dah" that I have a problem with the claim.
Yes, exactly. We have to think of the message as cut up into small
time frames, where I think a dah is 3 time frames, and a dit is 1.
In each frame the signal is either on or off, 1 or 0.
The morse code can be decoded by a software program which considers
the on or off for each time frame.
So the morse code is digital, but the units are not the dahs and the
dits.
Roger
Chris
Has anyone noticed how similar this, and similar threads, are to the
behavior of groups of wizards in Terry Pratchett's 'Unseen University'?
--
Chris
'Who is this Redo from Start?'
John Fields
>
> I'd say, he was the inventor of Boolean algebra, yes, but it was
> Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley, and some unnamed grunts at Motorola
> and Texas Instruments who really escorted in the digital age.
---
Hmm... and here I thought it was a couple of Indians with a smoky
fire and a blanket!
---
John Fields Austin Instruments, Inc.
El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas
"I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com
Harry H Conover
:
: Look at it this way. There is a fundamental time unit, the duration of a
: dit, which is equal to the duration of an intersymbol space.
So far, so good.
: A dah is
: three contiguous dits, making this an NRZ type of coding.
Sorry John, no. NRZ eqiates a level transition to a 1, hence a
dit would be 0110, a dash would be a 0100010. Couple this with the fact
that the bit clock for Morse is anything but constant rate (being hand
generated), the best description of Morse Code that I could define would
be a data transmission system employing binary signaling levels whose
interpretation is temporally dependent in a complex way.
: You can write
: each Morse character as a unique binary number, which demonstrates that
: they are mathematically equivalent. For example, - . - is 111010111. The
: space between characters is 000 and that between words is 00000.
[I'm trying to decode your example. Following your NRZ rules, I'm
gettin dot, a singnaling start, a space, a signaling stop, another
space, a dot, and the start an indeterminate something. Roughly, I
take this to be "Dot-Dash-Dot-Undefined. Am I messing up, or dis you?]
Sorry, you cannot (write each Morse character as a unique binary number).
You can write Baudot code this way, but not Morse.
You are assuming that Morse is transmitted at a constant Baud rate,
but it is not (unless computer generated and then it is not Morse Code.)
Think about it.
"Dit-Dah...Dit-Dah-Dit" or "Dit-Dit-Dit...Dah-Dit-Dah", at your
option.
Harry C.
p.s. John, if you're a CW operator, you're of course familiar with
the fact that the familiar "AR" and "SK" are normally sent as
"Dit-Dah-Dit-Dah-Dit" and "Dit-Dit-Dit-Dah-Dit-Dah" with no
inter-character spaces. So much for Morse being binary --
Morse is actually a language in iteself.
Rich Grise
>
> Rich Grise <rich...@vel.net> wrote:
> > Oh, the pauses between bits and characters are most certainly a part
> > of the information:
>
> > dah-dah-di-dit, dah-dah-di-dah is CQ, but
>
> ZQ
>
(but I did say it's been awhile!)
> Other than that you're right.
Thanks!
Rich
Rich Grise
>
> As long as you say that the two states are "on" or "off" I have no problem
> with the claim that it is binary. It is when people say that the two states
> are "dit" and "dah" that I have a problem with the claim.
>
Yeah, it has like five states: dit, dah, dot space, letter space, and
word
space. But then again ascii has 256 states (maybe 257, for "not
transmitting
anything") and I don't think anybody'd argue that that's binary, or
digital.
:-)
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
...
> I don't see how comparing things is an analogue operation.
You're right. I guess apples and oranges aren't really
analogous.
;-}
Rich
Rich Grise
>
> John Woodgate (j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> :
> : Look at it this way. There is a fundamental time unit, the duration of a
> : dit, which is equal to the duration of an intersymbol space.
>
> So far, so good.
>
> : A dah is
> : three contiguous dits, making this an NRZ type of coding.
>
hit "NRZ" by mistake rather than "RZ." Look at in that light, and
the example should be pretty obvious.
> Sorry John, no. NRZ eqiates a level transition to a 1, hence a
> dit would be 0110, a dash would be a 0100010.
...
>
> : You can write
> : each Morse character as a unique binary number, which demonstrates that
> : they are mathematically equivalent. For example, - . - is 111010111. The
> : space between characters is 000 and that between words is 00000.
>
> [I'm trying to decode your example. Following your NRZ rules, I'm
> gettin dot, a singnaling start, a space, a signaling stop, another
> space, a dot, and the start an indeterminate something. Roughly, I
> take this to be "Dot-Dash-Dot-Undefined. Am I messing up, or dis you?]
>
This is why I mentioned RZ coding.
> Sorry, you cannot (write each Morse character as a unique binary number).
> You can write Baudot code this way, but not Morse.
> You are assuming that Morse is transmitted at a constant Baud rate,
> but it is not (unless computer generated and then it is not Morse Code.)
I wonder why you say that if it's computer generated that it's "not
Morse
Code." It has the dit and dah pattern, what's the difference just
because
the timing is perfect?
>
> Think about it.
>
> "Dit-Dah...Dit-Dah-Dit" or "Dit-Dit-Dit...Dah-Dit-Dah", at your
> option.
>
> Harry C.
>
> p.s. John, if you're a CW operator, you're of course familiar with
> the fact that the familiar "AR" and "SK" are normally sent as
> "Dit-Dah-Dit-Dah-Dit" and "Dit-Dit-Dit-Dah-Dit-Dah" with no
> inter-character spaces. So much for Morse being binary --
> Morse is actually a language in iteself.
And as a final note, why do they call it CW (continuous wave) when
actually, interrupting it is the only way to communicate by it?
Questions, questions :-)
Rich
William L. Bahn
is that binary? If I write the number of apples as 101 do I now all of a
sudden have binary apples? Nothing about the number of apples has changed.
What we are referring to when we talk about 'binary' is how we have chosen
to represent the number of apples. Thus, we can be talking about the exact
same thing and, in one instance, it is binary and in an another instance it
is not binary because we change the manner in which we choose to represent
and/or describe it. Semantics.
Rich Grise wrote in message <391F3605...@vel.net>...
John Woodgate
inimitably wrote:
>John Woodgate (j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>:
>: Look at it this way. There is a fundamental time unit, the duration of a
>: dit, which is equal to the duration of an intersymbol space.
>
>So far, so good.
>
>: A dah is
>: three contiguous dits, making this an NRZ type of coding.
>
>dit would be 0110, a dash would be a 0100010.
OK, maybe I have the wrong idea of NRZ: It's no big deal.
> Couple this with the fact
>that the bit clock for Morse is anything but constant rate (being hand
>generated),
No, the vast majority of Morse has been automatically generated in one
way or another for many years. Ever heard of a bug key?
> the best description of Morse Code that I could define would
>be a data transmission system employing binary signaling levels whose
>interpretation is temporally dependent in a complex way.
>
>: You can write
>: each Morse character as a unique binary number, which demonstrates that
>: they are mathematically equivalent. For example, - . - is 111010111. The
>: space between characters is 000 and that between words is 00000.
>
>[I'm trying to decode your example. Following your NRZ rules,
Well, you've cast doubt on my use of that description, so you are bound
to find a problem applying your definition of NRZ to my code.
> I'm
>gettin dot, a singnaling start, a space, a signaling stop, another
>space, a dot, and the start an indeterminate something. Roughly, I
>take this to be "Dot-Dash-Dot-Undefined. Am I messing up, or dis you?]
- is 111, unit space is 0, . is 1, unit space is 0, - is 111.
>
>Sorry, you cannot (write each Morse character as a unique binary number).
>You can write Baudot code this way, but not Morse.
I just did.
>You are assuming that Morse is transmitted at a constant Baud rate,
>but it is not (unless computer generated and then it is not Morse Code.)
Whyever not? What makes it no Morse?
>
>Think about it.
>
>"Dit-Dah...Dit-Dah-Dit" or "Dit-Dit-Dit...Dah-Dit-Dah", at your
>option.
>
> Harry C.
>
>p.s. John, if you're a CW operator, you're of course familiar with
> the fact that the familiar "AR" and "SK" are normally sent as
> "Dit-Dah-Dit-Dah-Dit" and "Dit-Dit-Dit-Dah-Dit-Dah" with no
> inter-character spaces.
I'm not, but I do know that. In the same way, the distress call is
...---... not SOS.
> So much for Morse being binary --
> Morse is actually a language in iteself.
Now you've changed the definition of 'Morse' to include the
abbreviations, because they are the 'language' element. And they don't
make a scrap of difference to the underlying binary nature of Morse, any
more than Usenet abbreviations stop ASCII being binary.
dwight_...@my-deja.com
"Kenneth McKenzie" <ten...@home.com> wrote:
> T> piston. The same
> principles as the wankel except we are using high temperature carbon
with a
> double seal on the apex.
>
Hi
Although, thought to be the limiting factor
in Wankle engines, the apex seals in the
Mazda Wankle were not the weak link. The weakest
part was the water jacket seal ( essentially
a large 'O' ring ). These would fail, something
like a head gasket failure on a standard
engine. The damage would then take out the
side seals and the oil seal. The engine would
then burn excess oil. Most of the apex seals lasted
longer than the rest of the car.
The main reason for the end of the production
was that they cost more to assemble and Mazda
wanted to use a standard engine across the
rest of their line. Fuel consumption was
also an issue because of wasted bypass.
These engines still packed a alot of horse
power in a small package.
I see little advantage to having 50 power
strokes for each revolution unless you wanted
to do such practical things as pull stumps in
the field.
Dwight
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
John Fields
>
> In article <8SfS4.223715$Dv1.2...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> "Kenneth McKenzie" <ten...@home.com> wrote:
> > T> piston. The same
> > principles as the wankel except we are using high temperature carbon
> with a
> > double seal on the apex.
> >
>
> Hi
> Although, thought to be the limiting factor
> in Wankle engines, the apex seals in the
> Mazda Wankle were not the weak link. The weakest
> part was the water jacket seal ( essentially
> a large 'O' ring ). These would fail, something
> like a head gasket failure on a standard
> engine. The damage would then take out the
> side seals and the oil seal. The engine would
> then burn excess oil. Most of the apex seals lasted
> longer than the rest of the car.
---
As I understand it, the apex seals got more reliable as RPM increased,
while the waterjacket seal got less reliable as RPM increased.
I was sorry to see the demise of the Wankel engine, since it seemed to
be a clever implementation of a multi-cylinder rotary reciprocating
engine with a lot fewer parts.
Maybe it should've been air cooled?
Oh, well...
---
John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc.
Fred Kasner
FK
Paul Bowers wrote:
>
> It's obvious:
>
> The varying time delays between the ones/zeroes or dash/dots are
> perfect opportunities to transmit unwanted commercial advertising
> while the receiver is waiting for real information.
>
> Paul
>
> > I only claim the binaryness because it has two states - "on" or "off."
> > Now,
> > the timing of the "on" and "off" times is, obviously part of the
> > information
> > being transmitted. Maybe we could have a big philosophical discussion
> > about
> > whether that makes it no longer "binary" or "digital." The coding we're
> > talking about could probably be called (and I think has been for some
> > time)
> > "Morse." And it has an "analog-ness" about it (I just made that word
> > up),
> > in that one compares on and off times, and figures out which letter has
> > been sent, based on the results of that comparison. But, given that,
stu...@electech.electron.chisholm.vic.edu.au
wrote:
>There is information on the Khwarzimic Science Society site that
>demonstrably shows that the father of electronics is Thomas A Edison.
>
>The site also provides a glimpse of the future with unrestricted technology.
>The Radia Reciprocating Rotary Engine has one moving part and completes ten
>power strokes every piston revolution. It can be seen on the KSS Site at
>www.khwarzimic.org/takveen It is in pdf files that require
>Acrobat Reader which can be freely downloaded at www.adobe.com
>
>The site information will be changed in the near future to depict the
>prototype now
>being developed with all the sealing techniques incorporated in the rotary
>piston. The same
>principles as the wankel except we are using high temperature carbon with a
>double seal on the apex.
>
>The design now being prototyped has only carbon to metal contact and should
>not require lubricating oil to operate. Photo's and information about it
>will be
>submitted to the KSS in the next short while.
>
>Enjoy
>
>Ken McKenzie
>Ten...@home.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
William L. Bahn
De Guerin wrote in message ...
>You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
>
>What you do is to rotate a "magnetic shield" between the magnet(s) and
>coil. This will have the effect of generating a fluctuating magnetic
>field, therefore an AC voltage.
>
>Mu-metal would work, a superconductor would be a "perfect" magnetic
>shield.
>
>However, its *not* "free energy", you still have to rotate the shield.
>
>There is a way of doing this trick with no moving parts ...
>
>What you do is to get a superconducting plate and somehow get it to go in
>and out of its superconducting state. Possible methods would be ..
>
>1) Heat and cool superconductor
>
>2) Pass enough current across it to disrupt the "Meissner effect"
Do a search for Meissner Motors. They are a cute novelty that, at first
glance, appear to violate energy conservation.
De Guerin
What you do is to rotate a "magnetic shield" between the magnet(s) and
coil. This will have the effect of generating a fluctuating magnetic
field, therefore an AC voltage.
Mu-metal would work, a superconductor would be a "perfect" magnetic
shield.
However, its *not* "free energy", you still have to rotate the shield.
There is a way of doing this trick with no moving parts ...
What you do is to get a superconducting plate and somehow get it to go in
and out of its superconducting state. Possible methods would be ..
1) Heat and cool superconductor
2) Pass enough current across it to disrupt the "Meissner effect"
Any comments .. ?
Andre
E-mail returned to sender -- not enough power
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic (B)eer
On 1 Jun 2000, Ian Johnston wrote:
> In sci.energy.hydrogen Kirk Gordon <K...@gordon-eng.com> wrote:
> : I've visited the Khwarzimic Society site, and I have to confess that
> : I found it a bit strange.
>
> And how. Have a look at the "Radia Permanent Magnet Engine". yet another
> deluded clown who thinks that you can arrange permanent magnets in such
> a way as to get free energy out of them. Oddly enough, despite there being
> pictures of a Radia Internal Combustion engine (a straightforward four
> stroke Wankel engine with a floating rotor) the inventor doesn't appear
> to have made one of his amazing permanent magnet perpetual motion machines.
>
> Odd, that.
>
> Ian
>
>
Ian Johnston
D.H.Kelly
--
Don Kelly
dh...@homebody.com
remove the corpse to answer
"De Guerin" <da...@herts.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SO4.4.02.10006012150330.7978-100000@gemini...
> You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
>
> What you do is to rotate a "magnetic shield" between the magnet(s) and
> coil. This will have the effect of generating a fluctuating magnetic
> field, therefore an AC voltage.
>
> Mu-metal would work, a superconductor would be a "perfect" magnetic
> shield.
>
> However, its *not* "free energy", you still have to rotate the shield.
>
> There is a way of doing this trick with no moving parts ...
>
> What you do is to get a superconducting plate and somehow get it to go in
> and out of its superconducting state. Possible methods would be ..
>
> 1) Heat and cool superconductor
>
> 2) Pass enough current across it to disrupt the "Meissner effect"
>
>
> Any comments .. ?
>
>
> Andre
> E-mail returned to sender -- not enough power
> Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic (B)eer
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1 Jun 2000, Ian Johnston wrote:
>
Ian Johnston
: You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
Oh yeah?
: What you do is to rotate a "magnetic shield" between the magnet(s) and
: coil. This will have the effect of generating a fluctuating magnetic
: field, therefore an AC voltage.
Sure. Do you think you can rotate the "shield" without putting any
energy into the system?
: What you do is to get a superconducting plate and somehow get it to go in
: and out of its superconducting state. Possible methods would be ..
: 1) Heat and cool superconductor
: 2) Pass enough current across it to disrupt the "Meissner effect"
: Any comments .. ?
Why would you want to do any of this? I can think of lots of ways of getting
a small amount of energy out of a system into which I put a large amount...
The Radia Permanent Magnet Motor inventor claims that it will produce free
energy, which is quite a different think and interesting if true.
Ian
--
============================================================================
Any opinions expressed are entirely my own and should not be taken as
the official point of view of any organisation for or with which I work.
Charles W. Shults III
Meissner motor? It uses this principle and as one poster pointed out, appears
to violate conservation but actually does not.
Some small effects turn out to have real practical applications.
Cheers!
Chip Shults
SPAM free Email - aic...@gdi.udu.net but remove the .baryon
PGP \\ 8B27 CFD5 AAD5 67EA BF00
Key // 7529 9CF6 C3D7 233C D4D9
Mike Mccarty Sr
In article <8h8rqj$agk$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>,
Ian Johnston <engs...@sable.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
)In sci.energy.hydrogen De Guerin <da...@herts.ac.uk> wrote:
): You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
)
)Oh yeah?
Yeah, as a matter of fact.
): What you do is to rotate a "magnetic shield" between the magnet(s) and
): coil. This will have the effect of generating a fluctuating magnetic
): field, therefore an AC voltage.
)
)Sure. Do you think you can rotate the "shield" without putting any
)energy into the system?
Of course he didn't. In fact, he said it in so many words, which you
helpfully cut without mentioning.
): What you do is to get a superconducting plate and somehow get it to go in
): and out of its superconducting state. Possible methods would be ..
)
): 1) Heat and cool superconductor
)
): 2) Pass enough current across it to disrupt the "Meissner effect"
)
): Any comments .. ?
)
)Why would you want to do any of this? I can think of lots of ways of getting
)a small amount of energy out of a system into which I put a large amount...
He was making a point, which apparently went over your head.
)The Radia Permanent Magnet Motor inventor claims that it will produce free
)energy, which is quite a different think and interesting if true.
Which point is quite aside from the intent of the post, which, as I
said, seemingly went over your head.
--
----
char *p="char *p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
I don't speak for Alcatel <- They make me say that.
Michael D Lee
Ian Johnston wrote:
> In sci.energy.hydrogen Kirk Gordon <K...@gordon-eng.com> wrote:
> : I've visited the Khwarzimic Society site, and I have to confess that
> : I found it a bit strange.
>
> And how. Have a look at the "Radia Permanent Magnet Engine". yet another
> deluded clown who thinks that you can arrange permanent magnets in such
> a way as to get free energy out of them.
This thread just will not die ! What is it about the elusive *holy grail* of
perpetual motion machines that gets everyone so vexed?
Lets make an electronic analogy; positive feedback. One could argue that you
*are* getting more out of a system as output than input, but it won't work
without a power supply. If you removed the power supply and the system
continued to operate, how could you switch it off ? Indeed, this poses an
interesting engineering problem - what to do with the energy produced when you
are not doing work? You have a system which is unstable and will ultimately
produce infinite energy !
But anyway, what does this have to do with Edison? As for him being the father
of electronics ??? He didn't even invent the light bulb which popular myth
credits him with. It was actually discovered by swan! Take a look at this
link.
http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/lightbulbs/litebulb.html
Ian Johnston
: Your attitude leaves a great deal to be desired.
Boo hoo. I'm sobbing.
: Ian Johnston <engs...@sable.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
: )In sci.energy.hydrogen De Guerin <da...@herts.ac.uk> wrote:
: ): You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
: )
: )Oh yeah?
: Of course he didn't. In fact, he said it in so many words, which you
: helpfully cut without mentioning.
yeah, but he cut the bit where I originally pointed out that the Radia
Permanent Magnet Motor is yet another incarnation of the "arrange a set of
magnets in a permanently unstable configuration" delusion and instead
started muttering about primary school science games witha permanent magnet.
: He was making a point, which apparently went over your head.
And that point was? And its relevance was? You can get energy out of a
gallon of petrol without burning it, but that doesn't prove that fuel-line
magnets work.
: )The Radia Permanent Magnet Motor inventor claims that it will produce free
: )energy, which is quite a different think and interesting if true.
: Which point is quite aside from the intent of the post, which, as I
: said, seemingly went over your head.
Except that if you had ead the thread you'd have seen his magnet game was
without linkage in a followup to a post of mine about the Radia whatsit,
so he evidently didn't think it was "quite aside".
If you don't like the anti-pseudo-science heat, probably best to get out of
the sci.energy.hydrogen kitchen.
Regards,
Ian
Ian Johnston
: Ian Johnston wrote:
:> And how. Have a look at the "Radia Permanent Magnet Engine". yet another
:> deluded clown who thinks that you can arrange permanent magnets in such
:> a way as to get free energy out of them.
: This thread just will not die ! What is it about the elusive *holy grail* of
: perpetual motion machines that gets everyone so vexed?
In the case of the Radia doodah and its like, I think because it seems at
first sight quite reasonable that there must be *some* arrangement that works.
Proving that there isn't is easy if you are mathematically inclined but
not if you're more practically based, so hands-on people tend to go on thinking
that the theorists simply haven't tried and the theorists get annoyed that
practical types can't understand.
Ian
Harry H Conover
:
: perpetual motion machines that gets everyone so vexed?
I suspect it's due to the fact that, for the educated, the very notion of
a perpetual motion device is indicative of gross ignorance.
People respond accordingly, usually in an attempt to educate but someimes,
unfortunately, just to ridicule.
Harry C.
Rich Grise
...
> But anyway, what does this have to do with Edison? As for him being the father
> of electronics ??? He didn't even invent the light bulb which popular myth
> credits him with. It was actually discovered by swan! Take a look at this
> link.
>
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/lightbulbs/litebulb.html
As far as I know, what Edison did was spend a billion Rockefeller
dollars
finding 999 ways _not_ to make a light bulb, and then when he got one
to work, patented it, cutting the real inventor out of the picture.
Cheers!
Rich
Mike Hannon
De Guerin wrote:
> You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
>
> Any comments .. ?
Have you seen this?
http://www.icehouse.net/john1/motor.html
OHannon
Charles W. Shults III
<snip>
I have now - thanks for the laughs!
Mike Mccarty Sr
In article <8hb24s$k4c$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>,
Ian Johnston <engs...@sable.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
)In sci.energy.hydrogen Mike Mccarty Sr <jmcc...@sun1307.ssd.usa.alcatel.com> wrote:
): Your attitude leaves a great deal to be desired.
)
)Boo hoo. I'm sobbing.
)
): Ian Johnston <engs...@sable.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
): )In sci.energy.hydrogen De Guerin <da...@herts.ac.uk> wrote:
): ): You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
): )
): )Oh yeah?
)
): Of course he didn't. In fact, he said it in so many words, which you
): helpfully cut without mentioning.
)
)yeah, but he cut the bit where I originally pointed out that the Radia
)Permanent Magnet Motor is yet another incarnation of the "arrange a set of
)magnets in a permanently unstable configuration" delusion and instead
)started muttering about primary school science games witha permanent magnet.
)
): He was making a point, which apparently went over your head.
)
)And that point was? And its relevance was? You can get energy out of a
)gallon of petrol without burning it, but that doesn't prove that fuel-line
)magnets work.
)
): )The Radia Permanent Magnet Motor inventor claims that it will produce free
): )energy, which is quite a different think and interesting if true.
)
): Which point is quite aside from the intent of the post, which, as I
): said, seemingly went over your head.
)
)Except that if you had ead the thread you'd have seen his magnet game was
)without linkage in a followup to a post of mine about the Radia whatsit,
)so he evidently didn't think it was "quite aside".
)
)If you don't like the anti-pseudo-science heat, probably best to get out of
)the sci.energy.hydrogen kitchen.
)
)Regards,
)
)Ian
bc10
Its always funny when some dingbat asks a dozy question like
'who is the father of ........?' In any field of science or
technology there is a continuum of development and discovery with many
workers operating in dozens of different countries. Picking out the
'greats' who deserve special mention is a fairly pointless exercise
usually the province of people with degrees in History. That's why
Newton said that ' If I saw further than others it's because I stood on
the shoulders of giants' ( Very modest for Newton!)
The Nobel laureate Murray Gel-Mann said ' If I saw further than others
it's because I was surrounded by intellectual midgets'
Ho Hum
Regards Bruce
>
> De Guerin wrote:
>
> > You *can* get energy from a stationary magnet and coil.
> >
> > Any comments .. ?
Mike Hannon
http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/tesla/tesla.html
bc10 wrote:
> Mike Hannon wrote:
>
> Its always funny when some dingbat asks a dozy question like
> 'who is the father of ........?' In any field of science or
> technology there is a continuum of development and discovery with many
> workers operating in dozens of different countries. Picking out the
> 'greats' who deserve special mention is a fairly pointless exercise
> usually the province of people with degrees in History. That's why
> Newton said that ' If I saw further than others it's because I stood on
> the shoulders of giants' ( Very modest for Newton!)
Newton was a practising cabalist and alchemist.
> The Nobel laureate Murray Gel-Mann said ' If I saw further than others
> it's because I was surrounded by intellectual midgets'
How would you know from way down there?
OHannon
Mike Hannon
If you stop chuckling long enough to build one of these,
you won't be laughing anymore.
Of course, it's much easier to sit on your ass and
talk the talk
than to walk the walk.
OHannon
"Charles W. Shults III" wrote:
> Mike Hannon wrote:
> <snip>
> > Have you seen this?
> > http://www.icehouse.net/john1/motor.html
> >
> > OHannon
>
Charles W. Shults III
A familiarity with basic physics and thermodynamics will set you straight
here. If this scheme works, where is your Nobel? I tried a lot of this stuff
as a kid, and now I know why it didn't work.
Do you understand that there is no energy input and that there can be no net
energy output as well?
Mark Kinsler
>you won't be laughing anymore.
>Of course, it's much easier to sit on your ass and
>talk the talk
>than to walk the walk.
>> > http://www.icehouse.net/john1/motor.html
The site is typical of pseudoscience sites: very sophisticated graphics
and presentation used to showcase material from those fringe-science
booklets that used to be advertised in the classified ads of Popular
Science Monthly.
There is a swell assortment of magnet-based perpetual motion devices.
They all contain the same flaw, which is that you can't turn a permanent
magnet off.
M Kinsler
--
............................................................................
114 Columbia Ave. Athens, Ohio USA 45701 voice740.594.3737 fax740.592.3059
Home of the "How Things Work" engineering education program.
See http://www.frognet.net/~kinsler
Mark Kinsler
> A familiarity with basic physics and thermodynamics will set you straight
>here. If this scheme works, where is your Nobel? I tried a lot of this stuff
>as a kid, and now I know why it didn't work.
> Do you understand that there is no energy input and that there can be no net
>energy output as well?
My concern is that kids who don't know any better are made to research
science projects on the World Wide Web. When they come across
pseudoscience stuff, who is there to keep them straight? Not their
teachers, to be sure: most don't know what works and what doesn't, and
some are active Tesla enthusiasts.
Here's a keyword search you could use to detect pseudoscience sites:
Philadelphia experiment, Brown's gas, HAARP, mind-control, levitation,
hoverboard, over-unity, free energy, zero-point energy, new energy, space
energy, quantum vacuum, perpetual motion, cold fusion, anti-gravity, EMP
weaponry, Searl disk, Nikola Tesla, faster-than-light travel, alternative
physics, electromagnetic propulsion, aetherization, scalar waves, and time-
density waves.
Anything to add?
Pat & Donna Molvik
Mike Hannon wrote:
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/tesla/tesla.html
>
> bc10 wrote:
>
> > Mike Hannon wrote:
> >
> > Its always funny when some dingbat asks a dozy question like
> > 'who is the father of ........?' In any field of science or
> > technology there is a continuum of development and discovery with many
> > workers operating in dozens of different countries. Picking out the
> > 'greats' who deserve special mention is a fairly pointless exercise
> > usually the province of people with degrees in History. That's why
> > Newton said that ' If I saw further than others it's because I stood on
> > the shoulders of giants' ( Very modest for Newton!)
>
> Newton was a practising cabalist and alchemist.
What the F&^$ does that have to do with anything??
I practiced alchemy in the kitchen when I was a kid.... made some pretty
cool stuff too.
Pat
Pat & Donna Molvik
Mark Kinsler wrote:
You need to do some more research. Several of the items on your list are valid
technologies.
EMP weaponry: The US Army and civilian law enforcement suppliers are developing
microwave devices that disable computer ignition systems in vehicles and will
destroy computers from the outside of a building. I've seen a demonstration, it
works.
Nikola Tesla: I guess you don't like the ignition coil in your car or the
alternating current power supplied to your house or for that matter radio or TV.
All of these technologies are based upon his work.
Electromagnetic propulsion: Magnetohydrodynamics is a real technology. I did a
paper on this a couple of years ago. It works too. Granted, they don't have a
ballistic missile sub moving with this yet but it is promising.
That ramp magnetic thingey in that link a few posts ago may spin for a very long
time but as I'm sure you know it will not produce any useful work. It looks like a
variation of the Tesla pulsed magnetic motor which does require power to operate
and does work. It is currently under development by a Japanese company for use in
small applications.
Pat
Mark Kinsler
developing >microwave devices that disable computer ignition systems in
vehicles and will >destroy computers from the outside of a building. I've
seen a demonstration, it >works.
The demonstrations are largely bogus. There was a fellow who flummoxed
one of the TV networks into letting Diane Sawyer or someone do a
demonstration of his EMP device, but it wasn't a valid demonstration. My
guess is that it shot a bit of nitrogen gas into the engine of the car in
question (the hood was open) and thus caused it to cough a bit.
>Nikola Tesla: I guess you don't like the ignition coil in your car or the
>alternating current power supplied to your house or for that matter radio or
>TV. All of these technologies are based upon his work.
Most rf work was done independently of Tesla. He was indeed a genius, and
it's with good reason that the IEEE has an award named after him. But he
went bonkers when he was about fifty and thereafter was co-opted by every
charlatan in North America. It's this later stuff that's largely
celebrated by Tesla's fans: death rays, sub-space transmission of power,
time travel, and the miracle turbine. I voted for the young Tesla.
>Electromagnetic propulsion: Magnetohydrodynamics is a real technology.
>I did a
>paper on this a couple of years ago. It works too. Granted, they don't
>have a ballistic missile sub moving with this yet but it is promising.
I wasn't referring to MHD, though it, too, tends to inflame the
imaginations of pseudoscientists. MHD would be great if it worked, but
though I was a big MHD fan, I regret to say that it's proven to be far
more trouble than it's worth. We've been horsing with it for about fifty
years and not a single practical device has resulted.
No, my concern is with spacecraft that are somehow supposed to be powered
by electromagnets. All by themselves, without ejecting anything to
provide thrust. It's sort of a variant of anti-gravity technology, which
is equally bogus.
>That ramp magnetic thingey in that link a few posts ago may spin for a
>very long time but as I'm sure you know it will not produce any useful
>work.
I doubt that it'll spin unaided at all. It'll stop in about one
revolution.
>It looks like a variation of the Tesla pulsed magnetic motor
>which
>does require power to operate >and does work. It is currently under
>development by a Japanese company for use in >small applications.
The snail-armature motor has indeed been around for a zillion years,
though I didn't know it was invented by Tesla. It was supposed to have
been used to power a motorcycle (again, Japanese) in about 1970, but it's
really no better than any other electric motor. The only advantage was
that it was fairly light in weight: the coil didn't need much cooling
because it was pulsed intermittently. My guess is that it's been
obsolesced by the development of improved magnetic materials, which allow
the construction of very powerful small motors.
Rich Grise
> ....
> celebrated by Tesla's fans: death rays, sub-space transmission of power,
> time travel, and the miracle turbine. I voted for the young Tesla.
I can't speak at the "miracle turbine" directly, although I've seen
websites that claim to have working models. One thing I can claim is
that some years ago I was in Jim Fueling's shop, who is supposedly
the guy who came up with the 4-valve/cyl engine. I saw a very small
engine putting out a surprisingly large amount of power (and noise!)
but it was a gas guzzler. Anyway, Jim claimed to have used the Tesla
Turbine concept in reverse for the water pump for this engine. He
claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
isn't it in production?
(but Tesla coils are still fun! :-) )
Cheers!
Rich
John Fields
>
> > I would say that you have made me laugh harder, but that might be rude.
> > A familiarity with basic physics and thermodynamics will set you straight
> >here. If this scheme works, where is your Nobel? I tried a lot of this stuff
> >as a kid, and now I know why it didn't work.
> > Do you understand that there is no energy input and that there can be no net
> >energy output as well?
>
> My concern is that kids who don't know any better are made to research
> science projects on the World Wide Web. When they come across
> pseudoscience stuff, who is there to keep them straight? Not their
> teachers, to be sure: most don't know what works and what doesn't, and
> some are active Tesla enthusiasts.
>
> Here's a keyword search you could use to detect pseudoscience sites:
>
> Philadelphia experiment, Brown's gas, HAARP, mind-control, levitation,
> hoverboard, over-unity, free energy, zero-point energy, new energy, space
> energy, quantum vacuum, perpetual motion, cold fusion, anti-gravity, EMP
> weaponry, Searl disk, Nikola Tesla, faster-than-light travel, alternative
> physics, electromagnetic propulsion, aetherization, scalar waves, and time-
> density waves.
>
> Anything to add?
---
Uh-huh.
The wheel, horseless carriages, flying machines, ..;-)
---
John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc.
El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas
"I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com
Rich Grise
Cool! Thanks!
There's also some goop I threw in my air cleaner a month or so
ago, and I'm now getting 34MPG vs. about 28 before, but I've
been doing more freeway driving, so who knows?
Cheers!
Rich
Michael Hannon wrote:
>
> Rich Grise wrote:
>
> > Mark Kinsler wrote:
> > He
> > claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
> > centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
> >
> > But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
>
> The latest news about Tesla pump technology coming from
> the TEBA (Tesla Engine Builders' Assoc.) is that they are
> now being used in Winston Cup cars. Rick Koskela is building
> Tesla bladeless water pumps for them, and is getting good results.
> According to the latest TEBA bulletin, Rick says he's using
> them on his brother-in-law's Winston Cup car, has run three races
> with them, and in some qualifying for races. According to Rick,
> on dyno testing of the same engine with/without the pump,
> which he developed and adapted to standard pump bodies on
> Ford and GM engines (as shown in provided photos in the bulletin),
> they've documented a two-horsepower increase to the wheels
> with the bladeless pump design.
>
> OHannon
Walter Curnow
NOSPAM <mol...@gntech.net> wrote:
> Mike Hannon wrote:
> > Newton was a practising cabalist and alchemist.
> What the F&^$ does that have to do with anything??
> I practiced alchemy in the kitchen when I was a kid.... made some
pretty
> cool stuff too.
Sorry about that, Pat & Donna. We usually try to keep Mike in
sci.energy.hydrogen. But sometimes he digs under the fence and roams
the sci.neighborhood. We usually find him after a couple hours, down
the block barking at the scientist who lives on the corner, yapping
about how Tesla was the inventor of everything. Next time he gets out
and wanders into your yard, please feel free to rap him across the nose
with a rolled-up newspaper to shut him up, then give us a call and
we'll come over and pick him up.
I don't understand. We had him neutered last summer and the doctor
said that would stop his roaming...
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Steve Spence
Deluge, Inc. is a Phoenix, Arizona based manufacturer of thermal
hydraulic-powered water pumping systems with important implications for
remote locations and developing regions. Deluge's core technology, the
Thermal Hydraulic Engine, is designed to replace conventional diesel and
electric powered pumps.
--
--
Steve Spence
Renewable Energy Pages - http://www.webconx.com
Palm Pilot Pages - http://www.webconx.com/palm
X10 Home Automation - http://www.webconx.com/x10
ssp...@webconx.com
(212) 894-3704 x3154 - voicemail/fax
If we don't believe in freedom of speech
for people who we disagree with, we don't believe in it at all.
--
"Rich Grise" <rich...@vel.net> wrote in message
news:393FD8D6...@vel.net...
> Mark Kinsler wrote:
> > ....
> > celebrated by Tesla's fans: death rays, sub-space transmission of power,
> > time travel, and the miracle turbine. I voted for the young Tesla.
>
> I can't speak at the "miracle turbine" directly, although I've seen
> websites that claim to have working models. One thing I can claim is
> that some years ago I was in Jim Fueling's shop, who is supposedly
> the guy who came up with the 4-valve/cyl engine. I saw a very small
> engine putting out a surprisingly large amount of power (and noise!)
> but it was a gas guzzler. Anyway, Jim claimed to have used the Tesla
> Turbine concept in reverse for the water pump for this engine. He
> claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
> centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
>
> But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
Mark Kinsler
>Turbine concept in reverse for the water pump for this engine. He
>claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
>centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
The Tesla turbine is used in several industrial applications as a pump.
But the claims made for it as an engine are unlikely in the extreme: 100%
efficiency for a thermal engine, that sort of thing.
>But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
>isn't it in production?
A good point, but not necessarily an indication of bogusness. There are
styles and irrationalities in technologies as in any other field of human
endeavor, and sometimes perfectly good schemes aren't implemented for
reasons that aren't apparent years later. More often, however, the
highly-touted technologies of old turn out to be markedly inferior to the
stuff we have today.
>(but Tesla coils are still fun! :-) )
They are, and I really hate to include Tesla in my list of pseudoscience
indicators. But a mention of his name is, unfortunately, one of the best
ways to detect a fake technology.
Michael Hannon
Mark Kinsler wrote:
> >EMP weaponry: The US Army and civilian law enforcement suppliers are
> developing >microwave devices that disable computer ignition systems in
> vehicles and will >destroy computers from the outside of a building. I've
> seen a demonstration, it >works.
>
> The demonstrations are largely bogus. There was a fellow who flummoxed
> one of the TV networks into letting Diane Sawyer or someone do a
> demonstration of his EMP device, but it wasn't a valid demonstration. My
> guess is that it shot a bit of nitrogen gas into the engine of the car in
> question (the hood was open) and thus caused it to cough a bit.
Definitely a concise, well-researched opinion.
> >Nikola Tesla: I guess you don't like the ignition coil in your car or the
> >alternating current power supplied to your house or for that matter radio or
> >TV. All of these technologies are based upon his work.
>
> Most rf work was done independently of Tesla. He was indeed a genius, and
> it's with good reason that the IEEE has an award named after him. But he
> went bonkers when he was about fifty and thereafter was co-opted by every
> charlatan in North America. It's this later stuff that's largely
> celebrated by Tesla's fans: death rays, sub-space transmission of power,
> time travel, and the miracle turbine. I voted for the young Tesla.
And you pretentiously presumed through your ignorance in doing so.
I suggest you reopen that mind you closed up as complete, and take a gander at
http://members.aol.com/jnaudin509/index.htm and
http://www.enterprisemission.com , including
http://enterprisemission.com/whittaker2.html
http://enterprisemission.com/hyper2.html ,
along with dropping the pretense of being the
compassionate know-it-all trying to save people
from topics you only think you understand.
Leave the research to those who are willing to get off their asses,
since apparently, you've decided not to.
OHannon
> >Electromagnetic propulsion: Magnetohydrodynamics is a real technology.
> >I did a
> >paper on this a couple of years ago. It works too. Granted, they don't
> >have a ballistic missile sub moving with this yet but it is promising.
>
> I wasn't referring to MHD, though it, too, tends to inflame the
> imaginations of pseudoscientists. MHD would be great if it worked, but
> though I was a big MHD fan, I regret to say that it's proven to be far
> more trouble than it's worth. We've been horsing with it for about fifty
> years and not a single practical device has resulted.
Perhaps you simply didn't have the talent for it.
There are plenty of pianists who have played for 50 years
who can play excellent renditions
of other people's music,
but left to create,
they cannot write a song worth a damn.
> No, my concern is with spacecraft that are somehow supposed to be powered
> by electromagnets. All by themselves, without ejecting anything to
> provide thrust. It's sort of a variant of anti-gravity technology, which
> is equally bogus.
Try http://www.soteria.com/brown/
> >That ramp magnetic thingey in that link a few posts ago may spin for a
> >very long time but as I'm sure you know it will not produce any useful
> >work.
>
> I doubt that it'll spin unaided at all. It'll stop in about one
> revolution.
Prove it.
> >It looks like a variation of the Tesla pulsed magnetic motor
> >which
> >does require power to operate >and does work. It is currently under
> >development by a Japanese company for use in >small applications.
>
> The snail-armature motor has indeed been around for a zillion years,
> though I didn't know it was invented by Tesla. It was supposed to have
> been used to power a motorcycle (again, Japanese) in about 1970, but it's
> really no better than any other electric motor. The only advantage was
> that it was fairly light in weight: the coil didn't need much cooling
> because it was pulsed intermittently. My guess is that it's been
> obsolesced by the development of improved magnetic materials, which allow
> the construction of very powerful small motors.
You would be wrong again.
> M Kinsler
>
> --
> ............................................................................
> 114 Columbia Ave. Athens, Ohio USA 45701 voice740.594.3737 fax740.592.3059
> Home of the "How Things Work" engineering education program.
> See http://www.frognet.net/~kinsler
No thanks.
OHannon
Michael Hannon
Rich Grise wrote:
> Mark Kinsler wrote:
> He
> claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
> centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
>
> But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
The latest news about Tesla pump technology coming from
the TEBA (Tesla Engine Builders' Assoc.) is that they are
now being used in Winston Cup cars. Rick Koskela is building
Tesla bladeless water pumps for them, and is getting good results.
According to the latest TEBA bulletin, Rick says he's using
them on his brother-in-law's Winston Cup car, has run three races
with them, and in some qualifying for races. According to Rick,
on dyno testing of the same engine with/without the pump,
which he developed and adapted to standard pump bodies on
Ford and GM engines (as shown in provided photos in the bulletin),
they've documented a two-horsepower increase to the wheels
with the bladeless pump design.
OHannon
>
> isn't it in production?
>
> (but Tesla coils are still fun! :-) )
>
> Cheers!
> Rich
Michael Hannon
> >Anyway, Jim claimed to have used the Tesla
> >Turbine concept in reverse for the water pump for this engine. He
> >claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
> >centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
>
> The Tesla turbine is used in several industrial applications as a pump.
> But the claims made for it as an engine are unlikely in the extreme: 100%
> efficiency for a thermal engine, that sort of thing.
How do you know?
> >But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
> >isn't it in production?
>
> A good point, but not necessarily an indication of bogusness. There are
> styles and irrationalities in technologies as in any other field of human
> endeavor, and sometimes perfectly good schemes aren't implemented for
> reasons that aren't apparent years later. More often, however, the
> highly-touted technologies of old turn out to be markedly inferior to the
> stuff we have today.
>
> >(but Tesla coils are still fun! :-) )
>
> They are, and I really hate to include Tesla in my list of pseudoscience
> indicators. But a mention of his name is, unfortunately, one of the best
> ways to detect a fake technology.
>
> M Kinsler
Thanks for sharing your personal opinions, Mr. Kinsler.
Just remember that that is all they are.
OHannon
Charles W. Shults III
<numerous items>
You have made claims for this magnetic engine but provided no
substantiation. When such claims are made, some proof is expected because the
claims are contrary to what has been observed and is known.
The burden of proof, however, is yours, just like the claims. Your repeated
prodding to get others to do your research for you is worth nothing. If you
believe in this project, you should invest your time and money, not ours. And,
if you weren't such an ornery cuss to start with, you might receive a bit more
acceptance.
While it is true that many technologies that have real potential are more or
less overlooked, it is generally because of cost, materials, or lack of
information about them. What is know at this point is that thermodynamics
works and works quite well. Your claims are for something that would seem to
violate thermodynamics. Therefore, you of all people (being a reasonable
person) should understand the difficulty other will have in accepting your
claims.
To overlook these circumstances and to then attempt to insult others in a
public forum is in extremely poor taste. In short, put your money where your
mouth is. We are open to serious results. Otherwise, go away.
Martin Leibbrandt
<snip>
> >I did a
> >paper on this a couple of years ago. It works too. Granted, they don't
> >have a ballistic missile sub moving with this yet but it is promising.
>
> I wasn't referring to MHD, though it, too, tends to inflame the
> imaginations of pseudoscientists. MHD would be great if it worked, but
> though I was a big MHD fan, I regret to say that it's proven to be far
> more trouble than it's worth. We've been horsing with it for about fifty
> years and not a single practical device has resulted.
Well, i know one: The cooling pump in certain kinds of nuclear power
plants (in german "Schnelle Brueter", which would translate to fast
breeder), which uses liquid sodium as the primary cooling fluid. Those
pumps have to be most reliable (because the plant is driven
overcritical), and for that a pump without a single moving part is
optimal (and efficiency is not relevant here, though it is rather
good, since liquid sodium is a good conductor).
Martin Leibbrandt
mar...@ime.rwth-aachen.de
Mark Kinsler
>> But the claims made for it as an engine are unlikely in the extreme: 100%
>> efficiency for a thermal engine, that sort of thing.
>
>How do you know?
The theoretical efficiency of any heat engine is fifty percent at maximum.
Uses can be found for the waste heat, to be sure, but the promoters of the
Tesla turbine always seem to forget that there's a boiler or burner--i.e.,
an expansion of gas--involved somewhere in the works.
>Thanks for sharing your personal opinions, Mr. Kinsler.
>Just remember that that is all they are.
Yup. And they're the _correct_ ones, too!
bc10
When did they let you out?
>
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/tesla/tesla.htmlnce or
> > technology there is a continuum of development and discovery with many
> > workers operating in dozens of different countries. Picking out the
> > 'greats' who deserve special mention is a fairly pointless exercise
> > usually the province of people with degrees in History. That's why
> > Newton said that ' If I saw further than others it's because I stood on
> > the shoulders of giants' ( Very modest for Newton!)
>
> Newton was a practising cabalist and alchemist.
>
Mark Kinsler
>> question (the hood was open) and thus caused it to cough a bit.
>
>Definitely a concise, well-researched opinion.
Well, there's always hope. There's one fellow who's apparently made a
career out of scaring the hell out of everyone about EMP weapons: he gives
a seminar every year near Washington, DC and generally attracts some
attention. The problem is that none of these weapons have ever showed up
anywhere else.
>And you pretentiously presumed through your ignorance in doing so.
>I suggest you reopen that mind you closed up as complete, and take a gander at
>
>http://members.aol.com/jnaudin509/index.htm and
>http://www.enterprisemission.com , including
>http://enterprisemission.com/whittaker2.html
>http://enterprisemission.com/hyper2.html ,
"Enterprise Mission" pretty well describes the entire ouvre of Tesla's
later work, but I'll have a look.
Tesla tried really hard to recover, but his research hit a great many dead
ends, and this was mainly a matter of bad luck. It happens to lots of
research people: if you don't run into dead ends and grand schemes that
turn out to not work, you're probably not doing real research. But Tesla
didn't have much talent for staying within a budget. Perhaps worst of all,
he apparently started believing in that mystic persona that he adopted
when he was young.
The "persona" business was a pretty standard feature of a 19th century
engineer's toolbox: he needed to look like some sort of character to
attract funding. Edison used sort of a down-home Midwestern brilliant
hayseed act. Tesla used the old-world Gypsy mystic act.
>along with dropping the pretense of being the
>compassionate know-it-all trying to save people
>from topics you only think you understand.
Well, bogus is bogus. There are a lot of topics that I didn't put in that
list: nanotechnology, artificial sense organs for hearing and sight,
fusion power, magnetically-levitated railroads, and even hydrogen fuels.
Some of these aren't so practical, but they're based on valid work.
>Leave the research to those who are willing to get off their asses,
>since apparently, you've decided not to.
When their publications show up in real journals, I'll be delighted to
read them. I will admit that I tend to be prejudiced against science
monographs which appear on a Web site inside an animated border.
>> I wasn't referring to MHD, though it, too, tends to inflame the
>> imaginations of pseudoscientists. MHD would be great if it worked, but
>> though I was a big MHD fan, I regret to say that it's proven to be far
>> more trouble than it's worth. We've been horsing with it for about fifty
>> years and not a single practical device has resulted.
>
>Perhaps you simply didn't have the talent for it.
>There are plenty of pianists who have played for 50 years
>who can play excellent renditions
>of other people's music,
>but left to create,
>they cannot write a song worth a damn.
MHD might yet work. The difficulty is that the fluids involved aren't
sufficiently conductive. This prevents them from carrying the current
necessary to create a substantial magnetic field. One way to improve the
conductivity of a gas is to make it into a plasma, but this involves
heating it to temperatures that melt the apparatus. We haven't had much
luck at all with liquid MHD, though it's been used to pump liquid metals.
There are apparently a couple of proprietary processes that use MHD in the
glass industry, where they're used to handle the molten tin used in the
manufacture of float glass.
>> No, my concern is with spacecraft that are somehow supposed to be powered
>> by electromagnets. All by themselves, without ejecting anything to
>> provide thrust. It's sort of a variant of anti-gravity technology, which
>> is equally bogus.
>
>Try http://www.soteria.com/brown/
No doubt. I shall look.
>> >That ramp magnetic thingey in that link a few posts ago may spin for a
>> >very long time but as I'm sure you know it will not produce any useful
>> >work.
>>
>> I doubt that it'll spin unaided at all. It'll stop in about one
>> revolution.
>
>Prove it.
You can look at it and see. If it spun for more than one revolution, it
would spin for more. And it won't.
The standard magnetic motor can be reduced to a magnetized rotor that's
deflected by a permanently magnetized stator. The rotor rotates around
until it's at a point of equilibrium with the stator, and then it stops.
Then something else is supposed to happen. But that something always
involves the cancellation of the stator's magnetic field, and that uses
energy. If the stator was an electromagnet, you could turn it on and off,
and then of course you'd have an electric motor. These work quite nicely.
>> The snail-armature motor has indeed been around for a zillion years,
>> though I didn't know it was invented by Tesla. It was supposed to have
>> been used to power a motorcycle (again, Japanese) in about 1970, but it's
>> really no better than any other electric motor. The only advantage was
>> that it was fairly light in weight: the coil didn't need much cooling
>> because it was pulsed intermittently. My guess is that it's been
>> obsolesced by the development of improved magnetic materials, which allow
>> the construction of very powerful small motors.
>
>You would be wrong again.
Well, the snail armature motor keeps showing up in one form or another,
invariably touted as the wonder of the age. I think the Japanese are
entranced by the thing. It made a certain amount of sense back when
magnetic materials weren't as efficient as they are now, and when it was
lots tougher to control a traction motor. The power electronics and
magnets we've developed since then enable us to use a multi-phase
synchronous motor to do just about anything we need to. As with any
electric-powered vehicle, the snail-motor-powered motor scooter got into
battery trouble.
>
>> M Kinsler
>>
>> --
>> ............................................................................
>> 114 Columbia Ave. Athens, Ohio USA 45701 voice740.594.3737 fax740.592.3059
>> Home of the "How Things Work" engineering education program.
>> See http://www.frognet.net/~kinsler
>
>No thanks.
>
>OHannon
Well, you should have a look anyway. It will be an uplifting experience.
Mark Kinsler
>> though I was a big MHD fan, I regret to say that it's proven to be far
>> more trouble than it's worth. We've been horsing with it for about fifty
>> years and not a single practical device has resulted.
>
>plants (in german "Schnelle Brueter", which would translate to fast
>breeder), which uses liquid sodium as the primary cooling fluid. Those
>pumps have to be most reliable (because the plant is driven
>overcritical), and for that a pump without a single moving part is
>optimal (and efficiency is not relevant here, though it is rather
>good, since liquid sodium is a good conductor).
You're right. I spoke from the bitterness of disappointment. MHD has
shown up in a couple of places in industry. It just turned out to be
nowhere near the big deal that it was supposed to have been: I wanted MHD
generators to work.
I knew that they used MHD in liquid-sodium pumping, but I didn't think
that any liquid-sodium-cooled reactors were still in business. It would
be interesting to see if MHD is used anywhere else in metalworking, as
when liquid metal has to be transferred to a mold.
Nonnaho
consistently do they get the same HP from run to run?
Nonnaho
Rich Grise wrote:
>
> Two HP to the wheels is statistically significant!
>
> Cool! Thanks!
>
> There's also some goop I threw in my air cleaner a month or so
> ago, and I'm now getting 34MPG vs. about 28 before, but I've
> been doing more freeway driving, so who knows?
>
> Cheers!
> Rich
>
> Michael Hannon wrote:
> >
> > Rich Grise wrote:
> >
> > > Mark Kinsler wrote:
> > > He
> > > claimed it consumed about 20 HP less than the conventional vaned
> > > centrifugal type of water pump, but moved the same amount of coolant.
> > >
> > > But this was about 15 years ago. If this stuff is so great, why
> >
> > The latest news about Tesla pump technology coming from
> > the TEBA (Tesla Engine Builders' Assoc.) is that they are
> > now being used in Winston Cup cars. Rick Koskela is building
> > Tesla bladeless water pumps for them, and is getting good results.
> > According to the latest TEBA bulletin, Rick says he's using
> > them on his brother-in-law's Winston Cup car, has run three races
> > with them, and in some qualifying for races. According to Rick,
> > on dyno testing of the same engine with/without the pump,
> > which he developed and adapted to standard pump bodies on
> > Ford and GM engines (as shown in provided photos in the bulletin),
> > they've documented a two-horsepower increase to the wheels
> > with the bladeless pump design.
> >
> > OHannon
> >
> > >
> > > isn't it in production?
> > >
> > > (but Tesla coils are still fun! :-) )
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > > Rich
Bert Wikkerink
Michael Hannon wrote:
(a lot of stuff you've all seen before snipped out)
> And you pretentiously presumed through your ignorance in doing so.
> I suggest you reopen that mind you closed up as complete, and take a gander at
>
> http://members.aol.com/jnaudin509/index.htm and
> http://www.enterprisemission.com , including
> http://enterprisemission.com/whittaker2.html
> http://enterprisemission.com/hyper2.html ,
You have got to be kidding. This is real X-Files material. Don't get me
wrong, I would love it if there was absolute proof of ET life, but this
stuff is really stretching it. Kind of reminds me of the lines on Mars
that Hubble thought that he saw.
>
> along with dropping the pretense of being the
> compassionate know-it-all trying to save people
> from topics you only think you understand.
>
> Leave the research to those who are willing to get off their asses,
> since apparently, you've decided not to.
>
> OHannon
Michael Hannon
> Mike Hannon wrote:
>
> > http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/tesla/tesla.html
> >
> > bc10 wrote:
> >
> > > Mike Hannon wrote:
> > >
> > > Its always funny when some dingbat asks a dozy question like
> > > 'who is the father of ........?' In any field of science or
> > > technology there is a continuum of development and discovery with many
> > > workers operating in dozens of different countries. Picking out the
> > > 'greats' who deserve special mention is a fairly pointless exercise
> > > usually the province of people with degrees in History. That's why
> > > Newton said that ' If I saw further than others it's because I stood on
> > > the shoulders of giants' ( Very modest for Newton!)
> >
> > Newton was a practising cabalist and alchemist.
>
> What the F&^$ does that have to do with anything??
> I practiced alchemy in the kitchen when I was a kid.... made some pretty
> cool stuff too.
>
> Pat
>
He was a just a tad more involved in it than playing in the kitchen -
you don't know much more about him than his laws,
or the history of alchemy,
do you?
OHannon
Michael Hannon
is more the question.
Public service notice required.
OHannon
bc10 wrote:
> Mike Hannon wrote: SNIP....
>
> When did they let you out?
>
> >
> > http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/tesla/tesla.htmlnce or
> > > technology there is a continuum of development and discovery with many
> > > workers operating in dozens of different countries. Picking out the
> > > 'greats' who deserve special mention is a fairly pointless exercise
> > > usually the province of people with degrees in History. That's why
> > > Newton said that ' If I saw further than others it's because I stood on
> > > the shoulders of giants' ( Very modest for Newton!)
> >
> > Newton was a practising cabalist and alchemist.
> >
Pat & Donna Molvik
Subcritical = Decreasing reactor plant output (i.e. there are fewer neutrons
entering the neutron life cycle after every cycle)
Critical = Maintaining an even reactor power (i.e. the number of neutrons
entering the neutron life cycle is the same for every cycle)
Supercritical = Increasing reactor power (i.e. the number of neutrons entering
the neutron life cycle is increasing every cycle)
To say that a reactor is being driven overcritical is to say that the reactor
is continually increasing its power output while in operation. This is not
generally how things are done especially in a utility application. Utilities
like to maintain a fairly consistent output for their plants so they can
schedule their maintenance and refueling on a regular basis. I ask people all
the time what it means to them to say that the reactor is critical. They
usually tell me that it is a bad thing. I attribute this to Jane Fonda running
around in the China Syndrome yelling that the reactor is critical like the
world has just come to an end. This lack of public knowledge and understanding
coupled with lack of accountability in the private sector has killed the
nuclear industry in the US. I don't mean to rant but Nuclear Engineering was
my original line of work because I believed in it as a clean alternative power
source and now I can't find a decent job in the US. The current administration
has ceased all funding of new nuclear research. I bet if I asked Al Gore what
criticality means I would get the wrong answer out of him too. Enough of this,
my soap box just fell over.
Have a nice day :)
Pat
Martin Leibbrandt wrote:
> kin...@frognet.net (Mark Kinsler) writes:
> <snip>
> > >Electromagnetic propulsion: Magnetohydrodynamics is a real technology.
> > >I did a
> > >paper on this a couple of years ago. It works too. Granted, they don't
> > >have a ballistic missile sub moving with this yet but it is promising.
> >
> > I wasn't referring to MHD, though it, too, tends to inflame the
> > imaginations of pseudoscientists. MHD would be great if it worked, but
> > though I was a big MHD fan, I regret to say that it's proven to be far
> > more trouble than it's worth. We've been horsing with it for about fifty
> > years and not a single practical device has resulted.
>
> Well, i know one: The cooling pump in certain kinds of nuclear power
> plants (in german "Schnelle Brueter", which would translate to fast
> breeder), which uses liquid sodium as the primary cooling fluid. Those
> pumps have to be most reliable (because the plant is driven
> overcritical), and for that a pump without a single moving part is
> optimal (and efficiency is not relevant here, though it is rather
> good, since liquid sodium is a good conductor).
>
> Martin Leibbrandt
> mar...@ime.rwth-aachen.de
Graham Cowan
Mark Kinsler included,
"The theoretical efficiency of any heat engine is fifty percent at
maximum."
One minus T-low over T-high doesn't have that upper bound.
I would have thought 50 percent was a practical, achievable
limit, not a theoretical one. Right?
---------------------------------------------------------------
$1 uranium = ca. $124 petroleum = ca. $111 natural gas.
Electricity? Hydrogen? No, the indirect nukemobile power-taps
distant reactors through the fifth element, ~boron~. More at
http://members.xoom.com/I2M/boron_blast.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pat & Donna Molvik
Michael Hannon wrote:
> He was a just a tad more involved in it than playing in the kitchen -
> you don't know much more about him than his laws,
> or the history of alchemy,
> do you?
>
> OHannon
I am familiar with the history of alchemy and know that it actually occurs in the
core of a nuclear reactor in as much as you have the transmutation of metals
occurring. My comment was more in the direction of why is being a Cabalist and an
alchemist an attack on Newton?? They didn't understand the nature of the
subatomic back then. Almost all scientists of the time dabbled in alchemy. It
was a good way of maintaining the interest of your royal patron thus maintaining
your cash flow. Manipulating the greed of the already rich has been a worthwhile
occupation since the invention of wealth. Your attempted attack at the character
of Newton is a flaw in logic that belies your ignorance of correct thinking.
Pat
BTW: By correct thinking I am referring to how you think, not what you think.
Bert Wikkerink
Pat & Donna Molvik wrote:
> has ceased all funding of new nuclear research. I bet if I asked Al Gore what
> criticality means I would get the wrong answer out of him too. Enough of this,
> my soap box just fell over.
>
No, no. If you asked Al Gore, he would say that he invented nuclear
power.
Mark Kinsler
>the time what it means to them to say that the reactor is critical. They
>usually tell me that it is a bad thing. I attribute this to Jane Fonda running
>around in the China Syndrome yelling that the reactor is critical like the
>world has just come to an end. This lack of public knowledge and understanding
>coupled with lack of accountability in the private sector has killed the
>nuclear industry in the US. I don't mean to rant but Nuclear Engineering was
>my original line of work because I believed in it as a clean alternative power
>source and now I can't find a decent job in the US. The current administration
>criticality means I would get the wrong answer out of him too. Enough of this,
>my soap box just fell over.
Your point is well taken. That silly movie did a lot of damage to no
good purpose.
Superstitions surrounding nuclear power were one of the primary reasons I
started How Things Work.
Mark Kinsler
Graham Cowan
Mark Kinsler wrote:
>
> Your point is well taken. [~The China Syndrome~] did a lot of
> damage to no good purpose.
>
> Superstitions surrounding nuclear power were one of the primary
> reasons I started How Things Work.
>
> Mark Kinsler
> --
> ............................................................................
> 114 Columbia Ave. Athens, Ohio USA 45701 voice740.594.3737 fax740.592.3059
> Home of the "How Things Work" engineering education program.
> See http://www.frognet.net/~kinsler
But have you noticed how often the rolling-eyed irrational
masses are used by governments to rationalize policies
that protect their hydrocarbon tax take?
E.g., if you have Adobe Acrobat Reader*, look at the opening
of Phyllis A. Lyday's boron paper at
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/boron/120498.pdf.
The bomb-related liquid nuclear wastes at the Hanford reservation
have been a useful bit of propaganda against nuclear energy in
general, and it's interesting to see the American government's
attitude towards anyone who might have something to say about
their being solidified:
"The Hanford Advisory Board is an independent, non-partisan,
and broadly representative body consisting of a balanced mix
of the diverse interests ...
"... The Board consists of representatives from local governments,
businesses, the Hanford workforce, local environmental groups,
regional citizens, environmental, and public interest organizations,
local and regional public health concerns, the three tribes that have
treaty rights that are affected by Hanford cleanup decisions,
citizens of the State of Oregon that might not otherwise be
covered by the categories listed above, and at-large individuals
who have expressed a general interest in Hanford cleanup
issues and who might otherwise contribute to ethnic, racial, or
gender diversity."
To me it sounds like, "We intend to fix those wastes and we don't
plan on taking Yes for an answer."
When was the last public opinion poll in the USA that allowed
the public to declare which of fossil fuel energy and nuclear
energy was their preference?
-------------------------------------------------------------
*(The browser I use, Netscape 4.7, tries to dispatch a PDF file to
Acrobat and have it put the document in a Netscape window.
I have found this to be not up to usual browser reliability standards.
What works better is to use the right mouse button and "Save Link As". This gets
the PDF file onto your own disk, and then you set
Acrobat on it without the browser's involvement.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
$1 uranium = ca. $124 petroleum = ca. $111 natural gas.
Electricity? Hydrogen? No, the indirect nukemobile power-taps
distant reactors through the fifth element, ~boron~. See
http://members.xoom.com/I2M/boron_blast.html or
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/boron_blast.html .
---------------------------------------------------------------