Tri-Force Magnets - Finally shown to be OU?

[konduct]

shuddup asshole.

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi all,
I, have not noticed on here any link to   http://freenrg.info/Patents/Mag_Motors/US4179633.pdf

Regards
Den 

Hi Den
To me thats basicly the Johnson gate and motor just setup a different way
Take Care Den
Graham

[Yadaraf]

@Yadaraf,

That?s getting into the irrational. It isn?t true that at the macro level we?re discussing the matters here quantum mechanics has anything to do and that we cannot measure all the energy going into the system. On the contrary, we can, at that very precisely. We won?t have chemistry, for instance, if that were not the case and the egos have nothing to do with this fact.

Omni,

First, the grammar in your reply was very poor.  For someone who doesn't believe in CoE, you certainly applied CoE to your reply.  Use a little more energy, please. 

Second, science IS irrational.  Many of us understand that.

"Science for me is very close to art. Scientific discovery is
an irrational act. It's an intuition which turns out to be reality
at the end of it - and I see no difference between a
scientist developing a marvelous discovery and
an artist making a painting."

   -- C. Rubbia, Nobelist and director of CERN


"Science does not know its debt to imagination."

   -- Ralph Waldo Emerson


Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.   <= a favorite   

   -- Richard P. Feynman


Cheers

Yada..
.

[Omnibus]

@Yadaraf,

These quotations do not prove that science is irrational. The process of discovery, as any creative process, may have an irrational element in it but when the discovery is made, the fact, the phenomenon is rational. A scientific fact in this sense differs from a creation in poetry, music or fiction. In poetry, for instance,  unlike the outcome of a scientific endeavor, most of the time the result is an emanation of the irrational. That's why poetry isn't science. The closest a rational outcome can be to poetry one finds in abstract mathematics. However, when mathematics is to describe physical phenomena it is rational by its very nature because physics is rational as such. It may sound cute and amusing for the general public to compare science with art. After all public has to be won for the cause of science, especially when it pertains to convincing the Congress that more money has to be voted for it. In a serious discussion, however, no scientist worth his salt will succumb to populism and allow for the rationality of science to be substituted by the irrationality of art..

[Omnibus]

And, by the way, the arguments regarding what's being discussed in this thread must be rational if anyone serious is to pay attention to them. Unfortunately, so far, from a rational perspective if a self-sustaining machine is the goal there is nothing which would justify further study of this design. @CLaNZeR and @klicUK have done superb studies which unfortunately prove that this is another dead-end. I'll be the happiest person on Earth if you could prove me wrong.