Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[MarkE]

You simply have no comprehension for the materials you yourself present.  So here it is for you:  spoon fed in Technicolor on the very diagram you have been posting without comprehending.

[EMJunkie]

You simply have no comprehension for the materials you yourself present.  So here it is for you:  spoon fed in Technicolor on the very diagram you have been posting without comprehending.

@MarkE - I could easily go and destroy a perfectly good diagram with extraverted graphics to cover my backside too! I choose not to!

The only proof you offer is a diagram you molested?

I think there is desperate struggle to keep your pants up!

    Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[MarkE]

@MarkE - I could easily go and destroy a perfectly good diagram with extraverted graphics to cover my backside too! I choose not to!

The only proof you offer is a diagram you molested?

I think there is desperate struggle to keep your pants up!

    Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

I only added to the drawing emphasis of the information that it already contained, but you failed to recognize in any of the several times that you posted it.  Even with the reality pointed out to you in Technicolor, you reject it.  It's hilarious.

[EMJunkie]

@All - I was a bit harsh here - I apologise.

@MarkE - I could easily go and destroy a perfectly good diagram with extraverted graphics to cover my backside too! I choose not to!

The only proof you offer is a diagram you molested?

I think there is desperate struggle to keep your pants up!

    Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

After some time, I see what MarkE is trying to say. His statement is incorrect. He has made it messy because of this incorrectness.

Power is reactive in two phase regimes of current through a circuit branch relative to voltage across a circuit branch:  45 degrees to 135 degrees, and 225 degrees to 315 degrees.  Within the ranges of 315 degrees to 45 degrees and 135 degrees to 225 degrees power is resistive and not reactive. 

This statement is left to the imagination and implies something is happening when it is not.

If the Phase angle of Voltage and Current is not Zero then Power is made from components. Apparent Power (VA), Active Power (W), Reactive Power (VAr) and Imaginary Power (VA).

Implying the loss of any of these components at Phase Angle > 0 is not correct! A portion of these components still exists!

I have misunderstood what MarkE is trying to say because of his statement. A visual display of these components shown below in the pictures.

Power will have a value of each component at the desired phase angle. The Value of each component will vary depending on what the phase angle is. I believe what MarkE is trying to say, is that, if Active Power is greater than Reactive Power then the power is considered to be more Resistive. There is still a Reactive Component! Implying there is "No Reactive Component" is wrong!

So, now I see what you meant by your badly presented Statement, I accept what you're saying and apologise for my misunderstanding. Your intended definition was and is correct. Implying the loss of a Component was not.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[MarkE]

@All - I was a bit harsh here - I apologise.

After some time, I see what MarkE is trying to say. His statement is incorrect. He has made it messy because of this incorrectness.

This statement is left to the imagination and implies something is happening when it is not.

If the Phase angle of Voltage and Current is not Zero then Power is made from components. Apparent Power (VA), Active Power (W), Reactive Power (VAr) and Imaginary Power (VA).

Implying the loss of any of these components at Phase Angle > 0 is not correct! A portion of these components still exists!

I have misunderstood what MarkE is trying to say because of his statement. A visual display of these components shown below in the pictures.

Power will have a value of each component at the desired phase angle. The Value of each component will vary depending on what the phase angle is. I believe what MarkE is trying to say, is that, if Active Power is greater than Reactive Power then the power is considered to be more Resistive. There is still a Reactive Component! Implying there is "No Reactive Component" is wrong!

So, now I see what you meant by your badly presented Statement, I accept what you're saying and apologise for my misunderstanding. Your intended definition was and is correct. Implying the loss of a Component was not.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Hilariously, you grandstanded on your ignorance and still do so.  Let's see how long you try to wriggle on pedantics.  I have a clue for you:  The more that you do the more you will parade your ignorance.