Tri-Force Magnets - Finally shown to be OU?

[sm0ky2]

Understand, I'd love to see you proving OU in this device. However, with these gaps you're demonstrating you'll be shot down by any legitimate critic immediately. Notice, not all critics are idiots and morons or dishonest lackeys, there are many who do understand what they're talking about.

im not going to indulge in your idiocracies. im done with you, its obvious that you dont know what you are talking about, and/or arent even reading what i wrote. either way, When you are willing to perform the experiments yourself, then come back here and we can pick up where we left off, until then, g'day.

Performing the experiment is one thing. I'll do that in the coming days. The problem is that you don't understand fundamental things and that makes you vulnerable. I'm the last one who would want to see someone trying to prove violation of CoE being such an easy target to critics.

there are no critics here, except one, who is gravely misled about the forces at hand.

i keep telling you to examine this in the outward direction, you keep pointing at it heading inwards.
then shout "see! i told you so!"... and when i try to walk you through it in baby steps, you still dont understant your misconception. almost like its intentional. i have very little respect for disinformants. and i have a hard time believing that you are incapable of comprehension. so, i am left to conclude that you are either intentionally arguing for the sake of argument, OR, you are just completely dense, and stuck on some notion of magnetic fields that you are applying entirely out of context.  either way, any further discussion from me to you, or vise versa is apparently going to run around in circles and end up where it started... much like these machines we keep trying to build..

[Omnibus]

There's no inward or outward examination. That's another confusion of yours. The potential energy at a point A, away from a magnet, with respect to the magnet's surface (which is the generator of the field) is always equal to the work necessary to bring the studied body from the surface to that point A. The absolute value of that work is always greater than the absolute value of the work to bing the studied body from the surface to a point A', closer to the magnet's surface than A, despite the fact that the force on the body exerted by the field at point A is weaker than the force at point A'. This is unconditional. There's no inward and outward examination at that. You are confused about that and it's for your own benefit to understand it.

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi All
I thought I would show you a couple of videos showing how the stop the repel comming into the Trigate, I have 3 ways to do it and I have made videos showing two of them, the first uses iron as shielding at the front of the Trigate, the second uses iron behind the Trigate as the third magnet of the triangle locking the flux in and the third takes the steelballs away from the back of the Trigate turns the magnet around and let it connect again this also locks the flux in.
All 3 ways work you just need to tune the gate a bit by getting it the right distance from the roller magnet also the roller magnet must be right in the middle you have a corradoor it must run down.
Oh it wont let me upload the videos so you can find them at the Minato Wheel Group file section there names are ShieldedTrigate.wmv and BetterTrigate.wmv.
Take Care All
Graham

[Omnibus]

@Rusty_Springs,

For some reason I'm having trouble finding these videos posted in the Minato Wheel Group. Don't know what it is.

[HopeForHumanity]

Omnibus, I think what initiates these arguments are A: Disagreement(duh) B: Inability to be flexible(you) C: noticably telling people what to think D: Telling them that they are confused(big one). Nobody finds this attractive. Thus, if your objective is to truly teach people your experiments and your findings, you should find a new method to do it. Don't you find it contradicting to your objective? I wan't to learn from you, but it's hard too when your consistently arguing with other people. It makes me go, "wow, this guy is a really bad scientist". Regardless of you actualy being a good scientist, it should be your prime direction to present information in a friendly NON hypothetical manner (like don't equate the smot to the tri-gates). It's very unproffesional to just assume that something does or does not work off of a differen't experiment. I don't want to start an argument. I don't want to start an argument. I don't want to start an argument.

This post is a suggestion to methods that are less likely to build opposition and confusion.

Now, I know you saw my new thread. So please! Go there and run free like a pack of crazy polar bears. A place where you can intellectualy argue to your hearts content, without jamming this thread full of it.