The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

[pauldude000]

@loner and all

I have to agree. It is time to build this puppy. Whether one uses sine/squares/sawtooth.... I DONT CARE! Just try for rotation of the field, which would be discernable using nothing more than a cheapo compass. Get the field rotating, then post your schematic for this part of the coil, we can worry about the collectors when we achieve this. 

Remember that the faster the rotation, the better the output should be, and that the field on marks coils rotated faster than the compass placed inside could mechanically keep up..

We might discover five ways to skin the same critter.

Paul Andrulis

[aleks]

A light bulb does not put out coherent light in any form....??

It is laser that outputs coherent light. Light source working in a laser does not have to be coherent. Laser's "reflective chamber" produces coherent light and that's why it becomes powerful and thin.

Protons are positively charged, and electrons negatively charged.

Protons are not just 'positively charged', they are lacking 1 electron. This is a different thing than some 'positive charge'.

A permanent magnet has within itself a moving electric charge, due to the availability of free electrons within the atomic structure, the structure of electron shells of certain atoms, and peculularities of molecular alignment and interaction within the overall particular magnetic substance.....?

I'm not sure this correct. If they had an electrical field they would produce an electrical potential.

Concerning the electron/magnetic field/books.... what books?

Well, I've surfed Internet for this information. In many places there were references to real books. Of course, I can't give you these references, but you may use a websearch for these keywords - you'll likely to find a relevant information.

A "lack of charge" is called neutrally charged, not positively charged. It is by definition NOT of ANY charge.....??

Neutral charge is not a "lack of charge". Neutrally-charged particle is when all protons have electrons attached to them. Proton is like a "charge hole". It is in this respect becomes a "positive charge", because it really is lacking 1 electron charge. It may have some special "positive charge" field associated with it, but I've never read about that.

An ion, by basic definition is a charged atom or molecule. Free charged particles themselves are called ionizing radiation....?? You have me really confused here. (Just being honest.)

No, ionizing radiation is EM waves of high energy that produces ions by "bombarding" atoms and molecules.

I am not trying to insult you. I truly am not, but your responses to this last post make absolutely no sense to me, from the physics standpoint. If you are trying to speak a concept, and do not have the proper words to express your concepts, please state so and I will try to interpret. I do not fault anyone for this.

In this latest discussion I'm not talking concepts. This is what I've understood and learned. The only concept I was talking is "DC acoustical waves" which frankly saying do not interfere with any other physical phenomena. It only adds a tiny bit. And it is not an aether in common sense like a gaseous substance. DC acoustical waves are virtual as much as photons are virtual particles.

[aleks]

I must reiterate, Photons are not EM.  They are not a form of EM.

Then you are talking about some other EM and some other photons. It is a widely-accepted theory, quantum electro dynamics. EM is a field comprised of photons. Note that photon is a general name for 1 quanta of EM wave or field.

[aleks]

I have to agree. It is time to build this puppy. Whether one uses sine/squares/sawtooth.... I DONT CARE! Just try for rotation of the field, which would be discernable using nothing more than a cheapo compass. Get the field rotating, then post your schematic for this part of the coil, we can worry about the collectors when we achieve this.

You are right, no more words are needed. Just make sure rotation is achieved by sharp pulses, not by AC or DC current as in conventional schematics.

[aleks]

Aleks, I won't start a discussion on this, but I think you should look up "Modern" theory.

I, too, used to accept the BS in the physics books of old, but have evolved my understanding.
Seeing that EM energy has never been used to describe a photon as 1 quantum in any of the
physics courses I took, nor has anyone else ever stated that to me,

You may get some clues about photon being 1 quanta of EM field/wave. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamics "E=hv" is an energy of 1 quanta of EM wave of the given frequency "v".
The reason why wire can't emit light is because its atomic structure does not allow to create frequencies of light beam. I think if you can pass 5 Peta Hertz oscillation through a wire, you'll get light around wire. This is unachievable right now.

I think you do not understand my intentions. I'm not fighting you guys. I myself offered a concept which can possibly hardly be accepted by any established physicist. But this concept supports your vision of this SM TPU and why it outputs surplus energy.

I think electric potential field is a result of energy moving from potential state into kinetic state. All electricity, magnetics, mechanics and thermodynamics are about potential-kinetic energy transformations. That is why there is NO overunity possible in conventional physics, only loss. QED and quantum mechanics also follow these classical guidelines of potential-kinetic energy transformations. Simply put, physics does not deal with anything else (this, and inertial frames of reference). That's why it will have a HARD time trying to adopt any concept that creates or destroys energy in any part of the potential-kinetic energy chain. This concept will reform physics too much. It won't be physics anymore.