Quanta Magnetics Experimental Kits

[Pirate88179]

Is there an apparent effort to keep us in the dark?


And, if not, why not and what is purpose of this forum?!?

Isn't this forum supportive of these types of experiments exploring these types of systems?
Why is there an appearance of these efforts to discourage these experiments?

MileHigh -
Are you capable of providing any positive support for these possibilities we desire to explore per the stated purpose of this forum?

Kindest regards;

}:>

MH, along with several other smart (educated) guys on this forum serve a purpose to keep beginners and novice experimenters from going down blind alleys that have been explored fully before.  There is so much crap on the net and Youtube that excites these newcomers, even though they are nothing more than scam/fraud/faked videos and, lucky for us here on this forum, we have these guys that know better and attempt to save folks from spending hard earned money and time attempting to replicate a faked device.  MH, like the others, do not get paid for this valuable service...they do it in an attempt to promote real learning and experimentation. 

Do they know everything?  Of course not.  If you look at all of their posts over the years, there are times where TK, Mark E, and MH actually say..."I don't know" or "I am not sure what might be happening there."  It does not happen often, but it does happen.

TK, if he is confronted with something that appears to be outside of the generally accepted knowledge, will quickly build a replication and report all of his findings openly, wherever the chips may fall.  He does not have to do this.  In my opinion, the members of this forum are better because of this.  No one is paying any of these guys to share their hard earned knowledge with the rest of us.

MH does not do replications as far as I know, however, the opinions and conclusions he offers are usually supported by the other smart guys on here that do, so I am pretty sure he has spent a long time working in this field and knows what he is talking about.

So, the choice is yours, learn from these guys and respect their knowledge and be thankful they share it for FREE, or not and do it the hard way and keep rediscovering things that have never worked.

I love this forum and am grateful for all of the freely shared knowledge offered here which has taken me from a total newb, to someone that actually makes an interesting device every now and again.

Bill

[MileHigh]

Scorch:

What you have learned so far is that you have made many incorrect assumptions and statements.  You have been corrected so that you will be induced to stop and think and reassess your statements and realize that you need to address these issues if you want to grow and improve and get more out of your analysis of your motor.  You don't need a PhD for that.  Now beauty is in the eye of the beholder and if you were wise you would realize that my comments are in fact positive contributions to your efforts.

Reality:  Mike Kants is BSing when he claims that his flywheel will not slow down under load.  Talking about mechanical advantage in this case is nonsensical.

So it's up to you if you want to learn something and turn it into a positive, or just stick your head in the sand and keep marching forward talking pseudo-tech without substance and parroting stuff like the bit about the Schumann resonance.

Think:  Can you provide a rational and understandable reason precisely how and why a Quanta Magnetics pulse motor has something to do with the Schumann resonance?  Are you a parrot or can you think for yourself?

Don't hide behind the "you can't say anything unless you build the same setup" line.  That's just a cop out, a "get out of jail free card" so that you don't have to deal with real issues.  Let's say you go to a mechanic to service your car.  The guy has been a car mechanic for 25 years and has worked on thousands and thousands of cars.  Do you cay to the mechanic, "You have never worked on a 2002 Toyota Camry automatic and I have a 2002 Toyota Camry automatic so I am not going to let you service my car."  You don't say that, do you?  You would feel like an idiot if you said that face-to-face to your seasoned and experienced mechanic.  The same thing applies here.

Is there an apparent effort to keep us in the dark?

It's time for you to reassess and think about that statement.  Is that really true or is it just a fake attempt to hide your head in the sand and try to pretend that there is a "bad guy?"

Note your thread hasn't really started, you haven't done a single experiment.  Although I may comment once in a while, I have no intention of following it closely.

Also, please resize your posted images from now on.  I try to keep my images to 900 pixels wide or less.  Posting very large (wide) images makes it difficult for everybody to read the thread.

MileHigh

P.S.:  Bill, thank you for your posting of support.

[Scorch]

Hey MileHigh. 

This is correct. This subject was unintentionally created under the incorrect board of solid state, "kapanadze", devices and my message to Stephan requesting his assistance to move this subject to a more appropriate board has gone unanswered. So I merely created a new topic and I intend to abandon this one eventually and, hopefully, the admin will deal with it... eventually. . . .

In fact it's best I simply stop responding here which is perpetuating the thread.

And, of course, I will not be doing any experiments until I actually complete fabrication of the experimental test bed to experiment with.
Which will be detailed at a more appropriate forum here-
www.overunity.com/15030/gyroscopic-inertia-generator
Where it's best to comment there instead of here.

And, yes, I have noticed the image formatting has changed since all the work I did in the past here-
www.overunity.com/3842/muller-dynamo/msg376516

If I recall correctly; all the images used to remain small on this web site and I had to click on the file to see the large version which is the way it SHOULD be.
I prefer large images for better detail so, due to this web site failing to handle images and word wrap properly, this is kind of a catch 22 where larger images are prefered for detail but the web site is not accomodating these images like it should...

So what is the solution? Why has this changed?
How do we deal with really nice, clear, images but still maintain proper word wrap inside whatever the window size is?
Isn't this an issue for the web master?

My original images are typically high resolution images that are over 4000 pixels wide and they are already being down sized to around 1200 which looks ok on my monitor and not affecting word wrap here.
The fact is that it appears word wrap is not working at all and it just keeps generating a horizontal scroll bar instead of a wrap or sizing the image to the window....

Kindest regards;

}:>

Scorch:

Note your thread hasn't really started, you haven't done a single experiment.  Although I may comment once in a while, I have no intention of following it closely.

Also, please resize your posted images from now on.  I try to keep my images to 900 pixels wide or less.  Posting very large (wide) images makes it difficult for everybody to read the thread.

MileHigh

P.S.:  Bill, thank you for your posting of support.

[Pirate88179]

So what is the solution? Why has this changed?

It's called bandwidth.  That costs money and Stefan (Our gracious host)  has to deal with millions of posts, many of which have photos so, a compromise has to be reached.  I post everything at 800x600 and have no problems.  If needed in a certain situation, one could email a higher res photo to show some special detail although i would doubt that this would happen often.

Bill

[MarkE]

Hey MileHigh. 

This would depend on how "nit picky" I may want to be about these experiments.
My analysis may go no further that to confirm or deny the apparent affect in the video and I have no desire to become a PhD. in order to explain it in that particular language. 

I am not real concerned about the physics at the atomic level and it's illogical to nit pick specific wording vocabulary of a mysterious video versus over-all intent and examination of the device.
I will be respectful and honorable to my fellow man-inventor and actually build it and learn, for myself, whether or not I might be able to confirm or deny some of the apparent results by way of my own replication of the same experiment.

A "peer review" so to speak. From one backyard inventor to another.
Although, considering the background of this inventor and his well designed products and professionalism, this inventor is apparently a little more than a mere "backyard inventor" working with spare parts and hardware store supplies.

And, so until then, until I actually ACT in this respectful manner to honor my fellow man by reviewing his experiment; this is all talk and no action.

It may produce a unique effect or it may not.
But I am certainly not going to air such very serious accusations lightly and without any first hand knowledge such as actually examining the machine for myself.
Nor am I going to simply ignore possible discoveries merely because I hear somebody else say it's all BS (hearsay) who has not talked to the inventor and not replicated the specific experiment.

Without any proof of claim, of "lying" or "fraud", the allegations are merely hearsay opinions or frivolous claims from a party who has NOT actually performed any experiments with this specific test platform.

IF it does produce a unique effect that I may find useful for providing a little extra energy or demonstrating this effect for others; what care, I, the nature and cause?

Do I need to know all the tiny, little, intimate intricacies about how the machine works in order to use the machine by turning the switch on? 

Here is the scenario-
Party A says: "I am going to activate this black box and power my lights."
Party B says: "Don't do it because, in my reality, I believe it's impossible for this box to power your lights in your reality."
Party A accepts his claim, without proof of his claim, walks away and lives in darkness the rest of his life...

Is there an apparent effort to keep us in the dark?
At this point, and beyond a mere "good luck" statement, is there any evidence here of any positive, constructive, input about these interesting possibilities from any other user beside myself?
Has anybody here even considered or studied the sciences of the source field investigations complete with hundreds of verifiable, peer reviewed, scientific references?

And, if not, why not and what is purpose of this forum?!?

Isn't this forum supportive of these types of experiments exploring these types of systems?
Why is there an appearance of these efforts to discourage these experiments?

MileHigh -
Are you capable of providing any positive support for these possibilities we desire to explore per the stated purpose of this forum?

Kindest regards;

}:>

Scorch if someone wants for whatever reason to explore by experimenting, I think that is a good thing to do.  There is a lot that one can learn from the process of experimenting even if they do not get the results that they hope, and even if the experiment reproduces experiments that have been previously conducted many times. 

If the results of a proposed experiment are predictable, then  I see no reason not to state the prediction.  If the individual wishes to proceed after seeing the predictions, then that is entirely up to them.