Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)

[Magluvin]

Second--there are no magnetic !lines! of flux,the field is like a fluid--no lines of flux,but one smooth field.


Brad

But how do we know this for sure? Any evidence?

There is no finite definition of what makes up a magnetic field.

I find that lines of force are a very logical explanation and seem to work well with understanding the field in practice. How does claiming it is a fluid help our understanding of how we use it?
How does claiming it as a fluid help our understanding of the difference between N and S polar identities and how they interact with other magnetic fields?

How do we know if the fluid idea that replaces the field lines theory isnt just made up so that we may never fully understand magnetic fields for what they really are?

There must be a mechanism that is the producer of the N and S polarities. Like gravity. If we look at a pool of water and we try to push a sealed bottle of air into the water, the water pushes back.  If we fill the bottle with water and have it submerged in the pool, then we pull it out of the water, it seems like the air is pushing it down.  The difference is that the pool is actually pushing back the air bottle, but it is gravity that is making it seem like the air is pushing down on the water bottle. In the end, it is gravity that is the single cause for each event.

So there must be some polarizing force. Just because we cant see lines of force, it isnt evidence that they do not exist. Can you see the fluid?

Mags

[Magluvin]

WORK is the result of kinetic energy, so to have WORK done, the potential has to change to kinetic.

Work to me is getting something done that has an intended purpose. Its not like we see a tornado tearing up the land and say, man, look at all the work being done!

If we have a huge boulder on the edge of a cliff and we only need to remove a grain of sand to allow it to fall off the cliff, we have released potential energy. And if that boulder lands on another cliff below and is again teetering on edge, and we give it a little help off the cliff again, we have again released potential energy. In a way it is a controlled release like a clock mech.

If this boulder dropping is the desired effect, then carrying that boulder back up to the top cliff would entail actual work to get the desired effect. And if pushing the boulder off the cliff in the end does something of value, so called work, its not like it takes the amount of work to get it to the top AND the work being done as the boulder falls, all added up as the work required to get the job done. The work is in the lifting of the rock to store the potential to get the job done. After we do the work to get the rock up there, we dont have to release that potential. Thus the work is only to get the desired effect of getting the rock up there, for what ever reason.

The difference between power and energy is, if there is no energy, there can be no power. Energy is the potential source and power is the measured usage of that energy.

Mags

[memoryman]

WORK is a definition in physics; nature doesn't know or care whether you consider it useful. 'Useful' is an interpretation of 'what is'.
Energy is a scalar quantity; power is a vector quantity.
POWER is the rate at which work is performed or energy is converted.

[memoryman]

We are 'working' on that.

[citfta]

Back to this one

You need a simple device,, IMHO,,  A 0uf to 10000uf variable capacitor.  Set the cap to 0uf, connect the source and restrain the self acting tendency of the cap so that it presents a resistance equal to the  mA that you wish to allow to transfer.

Of course you will need to stop the transfer short and then allow the cap to "snap" the rest of the way so that you are ONLY at 4V.

What are you talking about here?  What is the self acting tendency of a cap and how do you restrain it to represent a resistance equal to the ma that you wish to allow to transfer?  None of that makes any sense to me.  And how does a cap "snap" the rest of the way to what?  Again, I don't understand what you are talking about.  I have worked in electronics for over 50 years and I have never heard of those terms used when talking about a capacitor.  Do you have some kind of reference for what you are talking about?