Roll on the 20th June

[gwhy!]

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... 

  How true. Thats what parents do cos there in the know.

[Mark69]

Hi all,

Been a way from the computer for a few days and lots of pages to read on this again. 

How close are the plans for a working wheel?  I see things going off in different directions and it is becoming easier to get lost on what is going on here.  Does anyone have a wheel put together yet?

Mark

[exxcomm0n]

@ MrM

Ummmmmmm.....where's "home"?

Our former complacency with status quo?

(Oh, how shall I put this delicately?)

Screw that.
It ain't playing in Peoria either.



@ Mark69

No cookie cutter instructions yet.

[exxcomm0n]

Back on the content side of the aisle that people bitch about not being populated enough, often enough............

@ all

What if you have your extension always in contact with the ferrite and the switch is made at the neo/extension connection?
Since the ferrite is for all intensive purposes "dead" to the roller until excited by proximity, it shouldn't elongate the field any differently than it does with the switch being at the extension/ferrite area, should it?

Is the attraction more towards the neo side than the ferrite side for switch consideration?

Anyone got any data on this as I haven't made the "ferrite leap" yet (though I am eying a 386 laptop power supply suspiciously)?

As to content, or lack thereof........

If'n you crave it so, why don't you furnish any?

Some do, some don't, and some bitch about those that do not doing it "the right way".

Hint: There is no "right way", only ways things have been done before.

[madsen]

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.)
=================================

Nice quote.  That pretty much hits the nail on the head, and refutes AQ's claim that he has achieved something outside of conventional physics.