Fluxite

[Fluxite]

Hey all,

2 videos regarding updates on our progress:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRsR24qnyD0
Magnet primer for Amateur Scientists and Inventors working on Generators.

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHF_AoflQVY
Theory behind what we are working on.

Moderator, I could not find a video section on the site so hope its ok to post here

Fluxite

[TinselKoala]

Hey all,

2 videos regarding updates on our progress:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRsR24qnyD0
Magnet primer for Amateur Scientists and Inventors working on Generators.

Please explain why you do not show the "prototype" spinning on its own at the end of the video.

(I know why, and so do you.)

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHF_AoflQVY
Theory behind what we are working on.

"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." - Richard P. Feynman

Moderator, I could not find a video section on the site so hope its ok to post here

Fluxite

I'm not a moderator, but I can't help but notice that both your videos on YT have "Comments Disabled". What is the reason for that, I wonder?

[conradelektro]

The "progress" is the 3D-printer, which allows to build nicely looking contraptions in a fast and comparatively easy way. (I like 3D-printers and eventually I will buy one. But this is not related to a permanent magnet motor.)

The "theory" does not give "consistent" results. And also a 3D-printer will not print a useful permanent magnet motor.

What you get for free at www.fluxite.com is not useful, but might be entertaining and can certainly be printed with a 3D-Printer.


Still, I appreciate that the "inventor" comes forward. I hope he sticks to the truth and shows everything when claiming something.

But as we have seen over and over again, the miracle will not be explained (because the explanation would make the miracle go away).


Greetings, Conrad

[Fluxite]

wow - you guys are harsh, like a bully.

In your comments, you failed to discuss the theory presented and seem to prefer nit picking, whereas I had hoped to have intellectual discussions on what we have presented to you.

As such, I consider myself to be much more an expert than any of you that commented previously, and will proceed to prove it.

==========
For those that understand or want to understand:

In the design of a permanent magnetic motor, the problem is and always has been the magnetic gate.  Passing the gate is not a problem, the problem has been the loss of momentum after passing the gate. 

The solution is to create a fixed in position low pressure (magnetic field dipole) using one method, then creating the movement (high pressure) using a second unrelated method.

The two methods are separated and require two different amounts of energy to maintain.

This is presented in the video.

No - we do not yet have a working motor, we do have a tested working theory for which I had hoped some of you would grasp and participate in the mechanical solution.

Warm regards,
Fluxite

[TinselKoala]

wow - you guys are harsh, like a bully.

In your comments, you failed to discuss the theory presented and seem to prefer nit picking, whereas I had hoped to have intellectual discussions on what we have presented to you.

As such, I consider myself to be much more an expert than any of you that commented previously, and will proceed to prove it.

There is no need for you to provide any more proof that you consider yourself to be much more of an expert than anyone else here... that much is already obvious.  However, how you consider yourself is not really relevant. The fact that you think you can make a permanent-magnet motor spin and create energy all on its own is evidence that your self-perception may not be... shall we say... entirely accurate.

==========
For those that understand or want to understand:

In the design of a permanent magnetic motor, the problem is and always has been the magnetic gate.  Passing the gate is not a problem, the problem has been the loss of momentum after passing the gate. 

The solution is to create a fixed in position low pressure (magnetic field dipole) using one method, then creating the movement (high pressure) using a second unrelated method.

The two methods are separated and require two different amounts of energy to maintain.

This is presented in the video.

Much of what you present in the video is correct and is common knowledge, and is news to no one here. (Leaving aside the questionable use of some terminology.) Where you break down is in your failure to demonstrate anything that is constructed according to your theory and actually spins on its own. Why did you not do this? After all, your prototype shown at the end of the first video embodies your theory, does it not? Yet you did not even bother to give it a spin with your hand, much less show it spinning on its own.

No - we do not yet have a working motor, we do have a tested working theory for which I had hoped some of you would grasp and participate in the mechanical solution.

Warm regards,
Fluxite

Please explain why, if you have "a tested working theory", you do not yet have a working motor.  You state that you consider yourself "more of an expert" yet you are asking for people to participate in the mechanical solution?  How do you know what level of expertise conradelectro has? Or that I have?

Are you having some difficulty constructing things with your 3-d printer? Can't get the right kind of magnets? Too much bearing friction? (I note for example that your bearings still have their shields/grease seals installed, which add unnecessary friction.) Or is it some more subtle reason.... like perhaps your "tested working theory" does not in fact work quite like you think?

And of course you did not explain why you have disallowed comments on your YouTube videos. Don't you realize that this is a common tactic used by people who don't really want discussion, but who are interested only in pushing one side of a polarized agenda? If you are confident in your theory and your demonstrations, you should _encourage_ all discussion and you should be able to meet criticism and skepticism with solid facts, checkable outside references, and demonstrations of your own.  The fact that you don't allow comments on your YT videos tells me that you don't really want to engage with your critics or hear what skeptics may have to say... and more importantly, you don't want the viewers of your videos to see skeptical or critical comments.