Roll on the 20th June

[purepower]

@Archer

Actually, LA is building its first few hydrogen fuel sttations as we speak, should be up and running by '09 if I remember the news report correct...

And quite a bit of process has been made by American and German auto-makers. What have the Ozzies done (besides the lawnmower)? And what are these lies? Care to share a link?


More on Dr Lloyd...

Did a lil more research, found he's more cracked than I thought. He's another one of those science mixed with religion nut jobs.

Fist of all, he claims the Biblical appocalypse is near. Any true religious man knows Gpd will never allow us to know when the end is. This is his first mistake. While I do believe there will be catastrophic events in 2012, they will not be Biblical.

Also, God and science will never mix, simply because we were not created to be able to understand God's laws. For more on this, read Stephen Hawking. Because we can never 'know' things in science, anyone why claims to is wrong from the start. God's laws tell us 'why,' and we will never know 'why.' All we can understand is 'what.' we can make observations over and over, quantitativle describe our observations, and assume it to be true until we encounter an anomaly and restart the process. This is what science and engineering are based on. Our current understanding of gravity is pretty damn good since we are able to calculate orbital patterns, velocities of falling objects, gravitational potential energy, etc with tremendous accuracy! We see the 'what,' but dont know why (God). As soon as you mix them, you are wrong.

-PurePower

[oak]

@evg

The weights on the ends of the rod weigh more than the water that is 'moving' down to the left. This overbalances the tube on the right side and it will spin. The white section between the weights is Styrofoam.

True, the weights on the ends of the rod weigh more than the "water that is moving down to the left."  But that's not enough to overbalance the tube on the right.  What you need to compare is not the weight of one "weight" vs. the weight of an equal volume of water, but the weight of the entire right half of the tube vs. the weight of the entire left half of the tube, after the rod has floated up.  On the right half, you have one weight plus styrofoam (plus whatever water there is between the rod & the side of the tube).  On the left half, you have one weight, plus some styrofoam, plus a weight's volume of water (plus whatever water is between the rod & the side of the tube).  The left side is heavier, and therefore won't rise up.

But let us know if your experimenting says otherwise.

[exxcomm0n]

Wow.

Religion.

As soon as politics became involved, I figured this couldn't be too far behind.

The thing with the bible is that it is a book, whose origin was interpreted by men,  written by men from many different sources (counsel of Mycia? supposedly from The Davinci Code), translated umpteen hundred times by men, and perverted or quoted out of context by men 18 ways from Sunday to justify this or that action.

Because of, but not particularly @ Pure..............

A sci-fi (science fiction) author (one of the biggies like Aurther C. Clark or Asimov) once wrote,

   1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
   2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
   3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic EDIT (religion, because aren't they likened to each other?).

(Ha! It was Clarke!    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws )

So I don't see the dichotomy  in light of #3.

I found via Google these 2 pages, that are ferreting out the "scientific principles" of the bible.

A somewhat slanted view:

http://home.att.net/~jamspsu84/ttocartic.html

Interesting....it comes with the actual verse notations:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencebible.html#n15

Is there a god?

If it can only happen the judeo-christian way, I hope not for it would seem that god built toys destined to fail the task he set them to with free will.
God (old testament) is also fickle, jealous, spiteful, contradictory, and easily offended.
Not a nice guy.

As for Jesus being the son of god, aren't we all supposed to be (formed in gods own image)?

There's a theory that religion was the 1st form of politics and "law", and the more I see of it (religious practice), the more I can see how that can be opined.

Is there a reason for our being?

I think so. But then we're back to "one million monkeys with one million typewriters......." because random chaos formed the world instead of intelligent design.

But it's hard not to think there is a reason when a sunrise can mean more than good hunting or easy foraging and be seen as beauty just for the way it looks, when music can calm the savage beast (man or animal), and hands can shape what was once dead and lifeless and make it appear a frozen slice of time in life.


Now we're back to philosophy again.

Look, you can say religion and science are mutually exclusive terms, but until one can completely and totally explain the other (since that is the aim of both, to explain why), there shall be this debate and neither side can win.

That OPINION is deep as a mud puddle and as easily seen into.
It's only an opinion, nonetheless.

[hansvonlieven]

@ House,

You are forgetting something here. In order for your assembly to move in the water the TOTALITY of your assembly has to be lighter than water, styrofoam PLUS the two weights. You are still replacing something light with something heavier against the desired stream as it were.

Hans von Lieven

[kude]

I'm kinda new to all this magnetic stuff, so please forgive my ignorance.  With respect to "the wall" has anyone considered modifying the magnetic field with iron ? (see pic) or with respect to AQ's fancy extra opposing pole magnet at the end, has anyone considered putting it on a fulcrum so it moves with flow so to speak ?

source for pic: http://www.tpub.com/neets/book1/chapter1/1j.htm

I was thinking about how to shape a magnetic field. For example use two magnets separated by a distance with one S end facing a N end of the other magnet. Wouldn't the repulsive field lines straigten out to flow toward the N of the other magent instead of flowing back to its own N end? I imagine the wall to be the flowback point in which the magnet of the gravity wheel hits. Now if your wheel's magnet could follow an elliptical shape or path through a series of these magents you could get the desired effects at 1 o'clock and 7 o'clock. The traveling  magnet would  repulse inward from 7 to 1 and then outward from 1 to 7. Any flowbacks of the magnetic field between the two guide magnets must be outside the path of the traveling  magnet. I guess the trigate stuff makes me think about this.

Also, you would want/need  a DC motor generator at the hub of the wheel. You align the magnets different polarites along the 7 to 1 diameter. To me it could be an extra mover or booster of the rods. The rods would have to be different by having a "L" at the ends with the magnet traveling between the split magnets and another "L" with another magnet floating over the magnets of the motor.

Does this make any sense? If I had a metal filings sheet I could see how the field lines look, but I don't.