Reactive Current - Parallel RCL

[pix]

And topic succesfully derailed to exotic BS.
Have a fun guys.

[onepower]

Michelson–Morley experiment
DEFINITION an experiment performed in 1887 which attempted to measure the relative motion of the earth and the ether by measuring the speed of light in directions parallel and perpendicular to the earth's motion. The result disproved the existence of the ether, which contradicted Newtonian physics but was explained by Einstein's special theory of relativity.

I found the experiment kind of comical for various reasons which seems to defy all logic and reason...

1)If the speed of light is constant and does not change velocity with a moving source then why would Michelson–Morley think the speed of light would change in there experiment?. As well why would they think light would interact with the Aether?.

2)As supposed scientists Michelson–Morley displayed gross incompetence in there false conclusion. Any credible scientist would have come to the conclusion that the Aether does not interact with light or EM waves similar to Dark Energy/Matter. In fact that's all they did prove and nothing more should have been implied.

3)The experiment was little more than cargo cult science based on a false premise to show a preconceived conclusion. This is why we need to be very careful as to what we think were seeing. An absence of proof in one flawed experiment is not proof of absence, that's absurd and amateur in my opinion. 

This is the same kind of twisted logic and false cause fallacies many in this thread are using. They think a reactive current can do work, not understanding that a reactive current does no work while an active one does. They have also completely ignored the forces/properties which caused the motion and produced the supposed current in the first place. I mean, if they wanted to debate a current that can do work they should have called the thread "active currents".

This thread is going nowhere so I will give you a clue...
Obviously, reactive currents are not the answer because they are simply involved in storing energy as a magnetic field just like capacitors store energy as an electric field. Logically neither kind of current, reactive or active, matters all that much as both are simply energy carriers. What we are concerned with is how much work is involved to produce an active current versus how much work it can do. So either we do less work to produce the same current or the current does more work than expected before it dissipates.

Regards
AC

[kolbacict]

Regarding the increase in vibration when adding a permanent magnet.
I finally found this video on my computer!

[alan]

Induction of opposing compressed fields 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls

[ramset]

Alan
Instead of your slow drip drip drip of infomercials
Perhaps grab a moderated board and teach the builders
Here something no one has seen ( after decade or more of drips)


As yet not one of these claims of magnet FE or ?POC etc
Has shown the ability to survive scrutiny or proper
Vetting !


If there is truly a gain mechanism
PLEASE
Share it ...
Thousands have tried this path
And not one verification of proof
Many unsuccessful attempts shared  !


But not one true gain mechanism ever replicated
And shared


Even recent posts here in this forum  by previous members of that group... who spent
Years! ( they referred to themselves as elite members ( or inside close nit group ?)
Have since left and started more tolerant group?

Yes it's true "they" are also hungry to find FE and hopefully
they also work to share open source ... if any discovery is found !

Grab a moderated builders board and post a verifiable gain for replication!


Just one true gain mechanism will do !


That the many open source builders reading here can
Reproduce and share on their bench !


Respectfully
Chet K
Edit
For comment below
Many reading here have done POC 1.7 when first
Shared years ago
Then the error was found ( claimants scope setting error)


Since then all manner of accusations... and never shown independently to work!


I will find a good reference when i have time
IMO
Better you should teach !!


And save time
Edit again
I see your comment on marathon man below
He struggled here for years with an attempt !
Never shared a success that I am aware of!