Roll on the 20th June

[gwhy!]

Picture a family day out where the parents tell the kids that they will arrive at the fairground at a specific time but the car gets stuck in traffic...  The kids then continually ask the parents "Are we there yet?" when it's blatently obvious that they aren't as they can't actually see the fairground.

Think about it...    ...This thread is a lot like that car journey except the kids aren't kids, most of them just act like they are.

Theres normally a older kid (Archer) that winds up the younger kids (so called oilmen) And from a on lookers point of view looks like the younger kids are the ones complaining the most. The older Kid thinks he is cleaver for getting the younger ones into trouble. But the truth always comes out in the end when on lookers start looking at the bigger picture..      

[kude]

A prominent/world.renowned scientist/physicist  wrote to me personally in regards to the Youtube videos i produced about AQ's wheel and what he is attempting to achieve.

Although i cannot reveal his name i wanted to share a portion of what he wrote to me in this forum. Judge for yourself the degree of relevancy. 

Here is an excerpt of what he wrote to me..

=================================
Thanks, "Queue," this is an exceptionally clear demo and discussion.

I think it is summed up in the conservation of energy law that KE + PE = constant, and to the degree that both gravity and magnetism are both considered conservative forces and can therefore be represented as gradients of potentials, we can't get from A to B with losses taken into account. (When Archer discusses PE, he only considers gravitational PE, apparently not realizing that that there is magnetic PE as well.)
=================================

I thought this Wikipedia article on conservative forces helps understanding: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_force Some do not agree that magnetism is a conservative force, it depends on case.

I could see how the moving arm vesion of the wheel, without some injection of energy from somewhere, would not work. I could see how a permanent magnet wheel faces the same conservative force problem and will not work. Now maybe a wheel with the magnetic track on left and using gravity on the right of a wheel might work if properly constructed using a solution. Somehow, I believe this is the state of this wheel (with different variations) at the moment. It seems like nature is forcing the move in this direction.

[purepower]

Right on Exx. Three buildings, at free-fall speed, into their own footprints. The free-fall speed bit defies the laws of physics. The official, "one floor fell onto the next, causing it to collapse, and so on" explanation might stand up if it - the collapse - didn't happen at (just about) free-fall speed. Energy would have to be used and absorbed at each and every floor, slowing the collapse way below free-fall speed. And certainly there would have been no energy left over to pulverise all the debris into fine dust. Perhaps PP could explain this one for us. I really would like to see him try (without mentioning 'conspiracy theories'). Really, just on the facts of the collapse.

Anyway, I spent one hundred British pounds on neo's and steel, chrome plated balls. What a mug, eh?. I wanted to make a simple over-unity toy based on Archer's over the hill and down the other side and through the wall video. See Archer, not everybody forgot about it...

The track magnets are a mix of 5mm x 30mm and 5mm x 20mm rod magnets. I've joined three 30mm magnets and four 20mm magnets and alternated them along the track, at an average distance of 10mm apart. I bought circular disc magnets, all 10mm thick - 4x20mm and 2x25mm diameters.

I bought 4 steel balls - 2x25mm and 2x30mm diameter. I find the two 25mm magnets on the 30mm balls work best.

It goes uphill and needs to go a lesser incline downhill to break free of the wall than it went uphill, hopefully leaving enough energy to get around to the start again, using some kind of low friction conduit like curved guttering.

I have a 35cm Mayernick array carrying two 30mm  steel balls up a hill. When I roll the traveller down the same magnetic arrangement it breaks free of the track at a lesser incline than carried it up (after I adjust the incline). So we have a little 'left over' energy, no? So say we make the up slope 10 times longer then the down slope. Then we have even more energy to play with, don't we?  One tenth the vertical distance of the up slope to break the wall versus the nine tenths 'generated' by the shunt up the hill? Surely a way can be found to get the traveller back around to the start.

If success in this endeavour is worth one hundred US grand I'll give it a go. And I'll give half of it to Archer if I make it. Not that money is my motivation at all. Far from it.

Anyway, if I had, say, a 30 meter track raising the height of the traveller to, whatever height, do you not think there's a way to get the traveller to fall using gravity and it's own weight, to the start point?

Or, even if we do, will we get the 'magnets are fuel' argument. Which brings me to a point: if the people with the money to meet the challenge (of PM) are challenged they can say "Oh, it's meant to be perpetual motion, like forever". So, I'll never get the money then, will I? Will  I have to wait, 'in perpuity' , for the prize money? Easy to make empty promises, isn't it?

Really though, If I showed you a video of it running around the track for three days, would that be enough to get the prize? Would it have to be three months? Where do you draw the line, anyone?

P.S. I will post a video soon. I think they are what count, rather then trotting out maths and formulae.And if you are going to trot them out then do, please, use them to explain the free-fall-speed collapse of the three towers on 9/11. If physical laws apply then they had to have applied on 9/11. Can't have it both ways.

Just commenting on the towers...

First off, the free fall speed is hard to swallow. If it did collapse in the pancake effect, there should be some delay while each floor fails on it's own occasion. Granted, the pace would increase as more floors collapse and the total weight increases, but this was not the case.

Second, jet fuel doesn't burn under atmospheric conditions. Again, jet fuel doesn't burn under atmospheric conditions. At my job, I deal with combustible fluids a lot (no comment), so I've learned quite a bit over the last few weeks. Jet fuel has a flash point of 100 deg F, meaning it has to be heated to 100 deg to even throw up a short-lived flashing flame. For sustained combustion, it must be heated even more and/or under great pressure.

Now the official explination is that jet fuel leaked from the planes, down the elevator shaft, to the basement where it burned and weakened the frame. Tell me, how was this leaked fuel heated and pressurized to it's combustion point in a ventillated, air conditioned building? The diesle generators? Doubt it. If the building was up to code (and I'm sure it was), they would have been isolated enough so the fuel wouldn't be able to get to it, and if it did it wouldn't have been able to be heated to it's flash point, let alone it's 300 something degree ignition temperature.

Also, the amount of fuel is miniscule in comparison to the building. I did the calculation a while back and found the volume of fuel available, stretched over the height of the crash to the base, resulted in a tiny .75 square inch column. Once you subtract how much was burnt off on impact or trailed off to other floors, the value is even smaller.

So not only was it not enough to do any real damage (to fire protected beams, mind you), there was no way the fuel could have burned!

Third, I saw some pictures of the site after collapse that showed some of the main supports had been "cut" at perfect 45 degree angles. This is a tactic used in demolition. They wrap explosive cords around the main supports at 45 degree angles so the buildings footing will just slide right out underneath itself, causing a perfectly vertical collapse.

That's the science behind it. Take it as you will, I'm not able (or willing) to make a stance one way or another.

If this is a governments destruction of it's own property to ignite patriotism for war, it would not be the first time it has happened in history, nor would it be limited to just this country.

That's all.

-PurePower   

[Mr. M]

Theres normally a older kid (Archer) that winds up the younger kids (so called oilmen) And from a on lookers point of view looks like the younger kids are the ones complaining the most. The older Kid thinks he is cleaver for getting the younger ones into trouble. But the truth always comes out in the end when on lookers start looking at the bigger picture..      

Falls down a bit on closer examination but I'm easy, I can roll with that for a bit of fun...

If we were to expand on your expansion of my analogy a little more, one could say that I am the one who turns around, being well aware of the bigger picture, and tells you all to stop arguing, grow up and act your god damn age or we're all going home... 

[bullsnbears1]

@ bullsnbears

Why don't you beat him to it?
That'd show you as a proactive, rather than a reactive thinker.

UPS truck w/ my mags en route today!!! Wooohooo!