Magnetic OU principle, You should really take a look at this !

[Tempest]

A flux capacitor???    Something that internally increases flux as energy is added to it. Then decreases flux as energy is removed from it. Sound like an inductor to me.

[Koen1]

Nobody heard of an electret (only few)

everything else you speak of is linguistic debate.

That only shows how little you know of anything.
"nobody heard of electret" hah!
What nonsense. If you haven't heard of the term "electret", then you
clearly know very little about electrical theory.

And while my pointing out that you are structurally using incorrect terminology
is indeed somewhat linguistically inclined, I feel I need to point out to you
that the terminology signifies very clear concepts in physics, and just
mixing them up is plainly confusing and makes you say incorrect things.
You may think that mixing terminology for electrical resistivity phenomena
and those for magnetic permeability and flux density phenomena does not
mean anything, but it certainly does. Not only does mixing them show how
confused you appear to be concerning the concepts themselves, or at least
how little you seem to understand of the crucial difference between electricity
and magnetism, but also it makes it a lot less clear what exactly you are talking about.
If you say "resistance" but you mean "decreased flux permeability", that's
quite a huge difference in what you're talking about. Yes, linguistics, but no,
not at all unimportant to use the right words.
Besides, weren't you the guy who flamed my very first post for missing words?
Am I seeing this right here? Is that same guy now telling me that the exact words
are not that important? Contradictory attitude, sir.

@BEP: I agree.

@Tempest: well, I guess that depends on how you look at it...
In my view, a capacitor is a simple device in which we can store electrical charges.
That is, we can connect it to a source of electrostatic potential difference,
and said potential difference will be "absorbed" by and stored in the capacitor,
untill we connect the capacitor in such a way that enables us to connect the
potential difference stored in it via a conductor, which allows the potential difference
to disappear as electrical charge is allowed to flow through the conductor to cancel
out the charge difference.
Crucial here is that the energy fed into it is in the form of electrostatic potential,
and the energy that comes out is in the same form.

Now to do so with magnetic flux, would yield a device that is fed magnetic flux,
then store that, untill we connect a magnetic material (which is permeable to flux)
so that the stored magnetistatic potential difference can disappear as the flux
passes through the magnetic material and cancels out the magnetostatic potential difference.
Crucial here is that we feed it magnetic flux, and the energy that comes out is
in the form of magnetic flux.

An inductor in general is fed with electric current and produces magnetic flux, or is fed with flux fluctuations
and produces current. In a way, it "transduces" electrical energy into magnetic "energy".

May seem like a small difference, but it is quite a significant difference in my opinion.

[carbonc_cc]

Flux-Capacitor:

A superconductor is a material that carries electric current without any loss of energy. Currents lose energy as they flow through normal wires. This energy loss appears as a voltage drop across the material--the voltage of the current as it enters the material is higher than the voltage of the current when it leaves the material. But in a superconductor, the current doesn't lose any voltage at all. As a result, currents can even flow around loops without stopping. Currents are magnetic and superconducting magnets are based on the fact that once you get a current flowing around a loop of superconductor, it keeps going forever and so does its magnetism.

[Koen1]

As long as you keep the superconductor cooled to at least 150 Kelvin
(with the newest cuprate superconductors, the old ones need 50K or lower)
and that still takes a huge lot of energy. Take that into account in the
energy calculations of your "eternal" inductor, and it becomes quite
inefficient...

[wizkycho]

I very well know what electret is. Other people (with different experitze) doesn't at all.
But what they do know is importance of Invention of Transistor that it had and still has in todays life of common everyday people.
Mag-amp WORD is unfortunately allso forgotten by everyone even those who study electricity.

What I clearly said is that Mag-amp deserves reincarnation cauise mainstream science still teaches our children that "static" field of
permanent magnet means nothing but to hold to the refrigerator. With mag-amp or mag-trans we are now able to OSCILLATE (CHANGE in TIME) strenght of INFINITE mag field. This is what is revolutionary here. CHANGE is only way to proof exsistance of real kinetic energy (so mainstream science must now agree). CHANGE is ENERGY and vice versa. Especially helpfull is if  that change can be made with smaller ammount of same media (flux) at the input. Allso if used properly magnetic transistor can be part of FE-OU device (Energy Transistor).

BEP and Koen1 you both missed the point. It is not about who will outsmart who here, it was all about how much of our ideas, knowledge and experiments reach everydays people. It is about Populization of idea and knowledge.  So to give it a push, mag-amp should be reincarnated with new more powerfullWORD. Magnetic field Transistor

Koen1

That only shows how little you know of anything.
"nobody heard of electret" hah!
What nonsense. If you haven't heard of the term "electret", then you
clearly know very little about electrical theory.

Why do you have to make most of your replays sounds like written by pompous full ?

Wiz