Roll on the 20th June

[madsen]

Given that we probably won't be hearing from AQ for a little while
I would like to pose this question to Everyone here purely out of
a curiosity in Human Nature.

With the evidence presented so far has anyone changed their mind
as to whether Overunity/Perpetual Motion is possible or not?


Please don't take this as being confrontationalist because it's not
intended to be. Where you stand now doesn't matter. Just interested
if your mind has changed.

ERS

My mind hasn't changed, but I'll play along if that's ok.   

If we give AQ the benefit of the doubt in his last video, it appears that the excess free energy that his wheel generates is very slight.  In fact, it seems to be right at the threshold of detectability, given the sensitivity of his apparatus.  Oddly, this always seems to be the case, regardless of how finely or crudely these devices are constructed. 

A skeptic would predict that even if you replicate AQ's machine with a more accurately balanced wheel, ultra free-spinning bearings, and so on, any alleged free energy effect would still not be clearly demonstrated.  I'm not encouraging anyone to spend the money to prove me wrong, however---all these parts are expensive!   

[exxcomm0n]

@Exx
Even when I play nice, have been getting along with shaky, complimenting AQs work, and even speaking civally with AQ himself, you have to come in and start playing the ahole card. It's okay, I'll remain calm and just dismiss it as side effects from the lack of herb.

@ PureP

You still don't get it.
I went way out of my way for you and you pissed on the effort.
I'm not interested in your explanations, contributions, or opinion anymore and wasn't really that much before.

Back then i was being "generous".

Anyways, I clearly remember saying "...just an anomaly in magnetism." Then you follow with something along the lines of "who wants to follow me into uncharted waters so generously called 'an anomaly.'"

Yup, I said that. I have no problems with my inference.
You could have just let it slip by, as I try (but usually fail miserably at) to do with the multitude of your sideways jabs.

This time I baited a hook and you bit.

It can be logically inferred that you were sarcastically reffering to my term as generous. I then cleared things up, followed by you being an ass and saying my input was not solicited.

By saying you weren't being generous, and then ending by saying you were?
Is that how real engineers do things?
Maybe that's why fortune 500 companies need so many layers and levels of them to even out the conflicting results.

Read again.

It says :

I didn't ask for your appraisal.
I asked if anyone was willing to invest time and effort into furthering a concept.

God knows I wasn't appealing to just you.

Even now that you are using blanket "quote" features, you can't be bothered to read it again even though it's right in the same window you type in.

IF (by some left handed nose wipe of God) you had answered the question, and not offered your appraisal of it, I might have said, "OK, there's one".

But no, I get to hear how chummy we've yet again become (homeskillet, which is just not the ebonics terms I choose to recognize as having worth. Thought I had pointed that out before.) and get a lecture on how I used the wrong word again, even when it was your word, and how scientific process must be "just so".

I'm a naysayer, you tell me to fuck off. I play nice and compliment his work, you tell me to fuck off.

Your idea of playing nice is substituting a magnifying glass for gasoline and a match for use on the ant hill.
Yes, ignore me please and fuck off.

No
Okay, I get it. You don't like me. That has become clear to me and everyone on this thread. There is no more need for you to post anymore PP mud.

I'm not the one perpetuating it here.
N'cest pas?

Now back to the real issues at hand...
I do remember making both of those statements.

These are not real issues, but if it flatters you to think so, groove on Narcissus.

One I adamentally stand by, the other I do not.

Yet it's my problem to go hunt it up?
I've done that before to a fault, and you ignore it, so I ain't no more.

I have built many ramps, pulleys, machines and have done the energy calculations for them, never accounting for "banked" energy. Funny thing is my calculations mirror the performance of the device.

Funny thing is the calculations never consider the time, energy, and engineering needed to make a machine, only what it does afterwards.
When you built these things, did they magically appear with no effort from you the way they do with pure physics calculations?

How many machines have you built? Did you do the energy calcs for them? Did your figures match your results? I thought not...

I build machines to do a job, not satisfy a calculations product.
They stand or fail on that alone.
So, that being the criteria, I bet I have built more than you, and most everyone met or exceeded the "figures" expected.

This is the difference between the real world, and that of calculations.

I've swapped engines in @ least 3 cars. and they all ran, but you would like me to calculate the difference in gas consumption from the swap?

K.....fast and easy.

The car when it had the non-functioning engine, consumed less gas. When the engine was replaced with a working one, it used more gas.

I'll take the 2nd over the 1st as that was the aim of my "banked energy".

I have not done any such work with magnetism. I have never claimed to be an expert in magnetics. I have said many times there are things I (along with the rest of the scientific community) do not understand or misunderstand about magnetics. From what I gather, magnetic fields have been considerred to produce conservative forces. From what I have seen with the trigate (and now possibly AQs device), I find myself questioning that assumption.
Good day.

Neither have I, but I'd much rather play with magnets to find out about them rather than reading about it or watching a video.

If you're questioning it, FIND OUT!
Use your hands while doing it.
I bet it will teach you more than a commensurate amount of reading AND be more enjoyable because the more questions that are answered by experimentation, the more there are to ask.

[kude]

Hi Mr. M.

I have no qualifications in, or in-depth knowledge of physics, so I'm no expert on this. But it would seem to me, from a purely common-sense angle and using ordinary language, that the energy you put into the ball when you pushed it was 'used up' resisting the attraction of the magnetic field until the field 'won the battle' and 'sucked it in'.  I mean it 'tried its best' to get past the field, giving it everything it had, but the magnet 'won the battle'. Where the magnet gets all the 'energy' to do this is totally beyond me!

It is said by some scientists that the earth is moving in a straight line in space. The presence of the sun warps space such that the earth is still moving in a straight line but as an orbit around the sun.

The magnet is just sitting there and the rolling ball falls into the magnetic field. So the energy is still the ball's until it hits the magnet.

What happens if your magnet is a ball of the same size as the rolling ball. You roll the ball past the magnetic ball. Which ones moves toward the other now?


I like the old basic. I could take algorithms and program them all day long. Basic made me really enjoy math and I could graph the results using Cartesian coordinates. You'll probably get your answers by programming all the equations for energy.

The rod track and rod traveller are kind of interesting. The traveller when brought to the field of the track snaps in to the end of the track bounces back, and then  to a middle position. AQ's loop is is very interesting, but I think the end of the track problems still exist. The ferrite solution, well we'll just see how that is developed.

[kitefreak]

Hey Mr. M.

Just after I wrote my post there, and before I read your latest one, I was thinking how I work in IT (programmer) and how I like it because computers and software are so PREDICTABLE. If something goes wrong there's always a REASON. It's all susceptible to logical analysis, change-test, change-test, etc.. The bugs can be easily tracked down and fixed. How much more difficult it must be to work with:

a) people (as a manager, say), or
b) nature, which is so unfathomable; deeply, darkly and luminescently beautiful, and far beyond our true understanding at this time.

I think working with magnets is going to fall into category b....

Yes, I've ordered some....

[bullsnbears1]

i didn't say anything before as i didn't want to distract AQ from his task or come off as just injecting more negativity ..
But it WAS VERY strange ..

a mystery to me for sure !!! 

Hey queue, I'm new here and I get confused by who is whom & who shows what where.

I like your approach & attitude. What is your website and/or youtube name?

Something this thread needs (it's huge & meandering) is an index of who is doing what, what everyone has shown to this point & that also lists contributors websites & videos. Also recommendations about sourcing materials (soft ferrite rods are an example). I dont' ask for much do I?

I just ordered a bunch of mags to start playing (I like to keep all this type of stuff fun & without pressure) next week.