Splitting the electron stream

[quarktoo]

Where is the Slorbo replication? Dumbasses

Quit being a smart ass dumb ass. A Slorbo can only replicated in a dumb asses imagination. It is an imaginary effect for those that can't understand physics and barely passed high school math.

You don't need the dumb ass pulse motor to replicate. Take stiffler's dumb ass "cold electricity" loopstick and pulse it at 21.5 mhz through a Colpitt's oscillator with two shorted coils of #34 on the ends of the core of 500 turns. It is a device I call OU for dumb asses and probably the most simple way to build an OU device. A smart ass will run the shorted coils to step down transformers to gain more energy.

Notice how when stiffler hit the 50% duty cycle of 21.5 mhz the output went up significantly?

PS - Only a dumb ass would publicly demonstrate an OU device smart ass. Half the people here are paid to look for smart asses that make that dumb ass mistake.

[quarktoo]

There are different types of bifilar coils dumb ass, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar_coil

Wow, yet another impressive cut and paste from a dumb ass. The flat coil is called a pancake coil by anybody that actually knows something about it and if you did, you would know that the flat coil could not meet your description. Therefor, the bifilar coil I described is EXACTLY what is shown in wiki and what you would be claiming to use. - Another FAIL DUMB ASS!

It doesn't matter how the coils are wound, as long as there is 0 inductance at the beginning of the pulse, and a net magnetic field and a net inductance after one of the windings is disconnected.

Good luck with that dumb ass. There is only one winding in a bifilar coil.

As far as the amp meter showing current flow isn't all that unusual in a PMH, because some materials will slowly lose their magnetization over time, especially if there are tiny gaps between the keeper and the "U" legs on a PMH.  If there's a small amount of current flow, then it's dissipating energy and losing its magnetization over time.  Disconnect the keeper, then most of the energy will be dissipated at once and the PMH will be at H_c.  That's why a LED will light when the keeper is pulled off the PMH, because it's dissippating most of it's energy at one time.  The best PMH is one that has no current flow, thus it will hold its charge for a long time.

GB

And this is where I pissed my pants laughing! You obviously can't grasp the concept of an AMP meter, connected to a PMH using copper wire to connect the two.

There isn't a "small amount of current flow" dumb ass. It is the maximum current in the circuit and it is retained WITHOUT CURRENT FLOW. THAT IS MY WHOLE POINT DUMB ASS. Good luck explaining that with your paste of Lewin's lecture dumb ass.

Why don't get out of your mother's basement for a while, go down to an auto parts store and spend 15 bucks on an analog amp meter. Build yourself one of those "best PMH" and actually do the experiment dumb ass.

THEN you can come back here, read my posts and realize what a dumb ass you are.

EDIT

If you put two amp in, you will read two amps on the meter. The fact of the matter is, you don't need the keeper or a magnetic loop if you know how to set up the experiment and measure the presence of the spin curl.

Compressing the spring in the meter is doing work and Maxwell's equations do not allow for free energy or perpetual motion. The amount of work produced to compress the spring for a long duration, exceeds the amount of energy that went into the system which violates second law. You can't just write off thermodynamics with silly terms like residual magnetism or whatever you or Lewin came up with.

You gloss right over that kind of stuff that falls under "because I said so" science. You don't have a complete enough understanding of the subject to notice those little things that Lewin is ignoring while he programs children into thinking they understand EM. Those 22 flaws that Marinov cited never were explained away by Lewin or anybody else. That is the difference between your monkey see, monkey do programming and my experience.

That being said, I can see where you are trying to go with the bifilar idea. I know more than I am will to share with you since you are a prick and a dumb ass but keep thinking about it and have a look at Ron Hubbard and Marinov. They both used a spark struck against the inductor to set the field in motion but there is a better way that is not so random.

The spark happening here and there at just the right time produced a reflective wave that compressed, polarized  and "accelerated" the field setting it in motion. The PMH is static.

Hubbard had a better way of harvesting the energy than Marinov.

Oh, I almost forgot - dumb ass.

[gravityblock]

There isn't a "small amount of current flow" dumb ass. It is the maximum current in the circuit and it is retained WITHOUT CURRENT FLOW. THAT IS MY WHOLE POINT DUMB ASS. Good luck explaining that with your paste of Lewin's lecture dumb ass.

The PMH will lose it's stored energy at the rate determined by the resistance or load of the circuit when shorted, just like a capacitor. If the coils in the PMH isn't shorted, then it's not releasing any energy, just like a capacitor doesn't release it's energy when not shorted.  The PMH doesn't release more energy than what was put into it, just like a capacitor doesn't release more energy than what was put into it. There is nothing perpertual about the permenant magnet holder.  PMH = "permanent magnet holder", and does not equal "perpetual motion holder".

GB

[quarktoo]

The PMH will lose it's stored energy at the rate determined by the resistance or load of the circuit when shorted, just like a capacitor. If the coils in the PMH isn't shorted, then it's not releasing any energy, just like a capacitor doesn't release it's energy when not shorted.  The PMH doesn't release more energy than what was put into it, just like a capacitor doesn't release more energy than what was put into it. There is nothing perpertual about the permenant magnet holder.  PMH = "permanent magnet holder", and does not equal "perpetual motion holder".

GB

The PMH will lose it's stored energy at the rate determined by the resistance or load of the circuit when shorted, just like a capacitor.

Dude... Without voltage there is no current flow and and without current flow, there can be no resistance. Sorry dumb ass, you are still a below average pretender and no amount of more stupid is going to change that.

If the coils in the PMH isn't shorted, then it's not releasing any energy

Dude.. If the coils are not shorted, it is not a PMH... Are you high?

The PMH doesn't release more energy than what was put into it, just like a capacitor doesn't release more energy than what was put into it.

Dude... Just because you don't know how to harvest the energy does not mean it is not there. The vacuum field is there and you can measure it with a special coil you won't be able to paste from the wiki (Hubbard) or a copper disk. (Marinov) A sixth grader named Joe did know how to harvest the energy from the vacuum field and outsmarted both you and Lewin with an old engine block as a test bed. But then... Joe did critical thinking, not magical thinking.

There is nothing perpertual about the permenant magnet holder.  PMH = "permanent magnet holder", and does not equal "perpetual motion holder".

The field that is "permanent" is as perpetual as a permanent magnet. Now you are playing semantics but are too stupid to look up the definition before playing the game. Here, since you are not bright enough to even spell both the words perpetual or permanent  correctly, I'll feed you the definitions on a silver platter:

per·ma·nent
1. existing perpetually; everlasting, esp. without significant change.

per·pet·u·al
1. continuing or enduring forever; everlasting.

You are without a doubt the dumbest ass I have ever had the pleasure of handing his dumb ass to. If you had an ounce of integrity, you would go to the nearest tattoo parlor and have "Quartoo's bitch" branded on your dumb ass. You have however helped me prove that you can't fix stupid anymore than you can fix crazy. But then, there really is no difference. Hence my suggestion:

http://listverse.com/2010/01/07/top-10-common-faults-in-human-thought/

Checkmate.

[gravityblock]

Wow, yet another impressive cut and paste from a dumb ass. The flat coil is called a pancake coil by anybody that actually knows something about it and if you did, you would know that the flat coil could not meet your description. Therefor, the bifilar coil I described is EXACTLY what is shown in wiki and what you would be claiming to use. - Another FAIL DUMB ASS!

Your only focusing on one type of bifilar coil.  Below is another quote from Wiki.

A different type of bifilar coil is used in some relay windings and transformers used for a switched-mode power supply to suppress back-emf. In this case, the two wire coils are closely spaced and wound in parallel but are electrically isolated from each other. The primary coil is driven to operate the relay, and the secondary coil is short-circuited inside the case.

As you can see in the above quote, a certain type of bifilar coil uses two wire coils wound in parallel and electrically isolated from each other, instead of the single wire bifilar coil you are referencing.  With my idea, the two wire coils wound in parallel will be energized in opposite directions at the beginning of the pulse with 0 net inductance.  Then one of the coils will be disconnected shortly after so the current is flowing at it's maximum value allowed by the resistance almost instantaneously with a net magnetic field and a net inductance.  This allows for no BEMF as the dual magnets depart from TDC because the current has no rate of change when it's already at it's maximum value allowed by the resistance.

You can try to play with the words and definitions all you want, but it's not going to change the idea in which I'm trying to convey.

GB