Roll on the 20th June

[shakman]

Archer, you seem to have a lot of time for chit chatting in forums and excessive ramblings for someone that is about to unleash perpetual motion on the world. Put down the mouse and keyboard and get busy! We don't want to hear any more BS until you have a working prototype to show the world.

You could shut us all up pretty quick and bury Newton forever with a video of it working. But I guess like the sign says in your neighborhood bar, "Free Beer Tomorrow!".

I will take any bets against Archer not delivering anything on June 20th but more ramblings and BS. I will give you 10 to 1 odds. For those of you that are bad at math (otherwise known as Acherites), this means that for every dollar you are willing to bet on Archer I will give you ten dollars if he succeeds. When Archer fails, you will only owe a dollar. Oh, what the heck, let's make in 100 to 1.

Since I am willing to give such generous odds, I am only accepting wagers of $10 or more. If you place your bet within the next 24 hours I will give you 1000 to 1 odds (with no limit on how much you can wager).

Send your money via PayPal to Newtonian.God@gmail.com.

@Newt

Wow, wouldn't you know it. Newt has made just over 50 posts and ALL of them have been negative, and none of them have been constructive. I was hoping I could find a reason not to put shit on him (again!) but I couldn't find one good reason (not even one). If you're going to run some sort of betting ring, it's a good idea to give people your real name mate. At least when I donate to Archer I can see where the cash is going every time I see his pics and his vids. I'll be sure that your little betting scam which you opened up with here gets followed up in every jurisdiction if/when Archer gets his wheel working.

You may be right on some points in your last post, admittedly I only started reading Archer's site after reading elsewhere about it. I am going on what I have read since I've been following and I never read anywhere that he claimed to have a working wheel and have always been under the impression that he had a toy, powered, electro-mag wheel. You could tell me he said anything before then and as far as I'm concerned it will be your word versus his from my point of view, unless either of you can prove otherwise.

So why do I support Archer you might ask? I looked at his idea and thought "this might just work". So whether or not Archer said he had a working OU wheel previously or not I think the idea has merit and Archer's willingness to build something to prove/disprove it makes me a keen supporter. Unless you have something constructive to show me I won't be listening.

Whether or not you are right about Archer's claims, and whether or not the alleged claims were true or false, as far as I'm concerned you're a broken record and you've just jumped the shark again. Please come back when you have something worthwhile to contribute. I can only assume by your posts so far that you are so threatened by the possibility that Archer may have discovered something here that you are trying to get this thread shut-down but repeating the same crap over and over. If this is not the case, I will let you stick your boot in one more time without reply if you promise that you won't post again until you have something constructive to add (negative or positive) and not just repeat what you've been saying for the last 10 posts. Or maybe you'll take a PayPal donation at Newtonian.God@gmail.com to STFU and give us some peace for research around here?

If you still feel the need to come back and pose the same questions over and over again, you need some serious help. I am sure I can get in touch with that psychiatrist for you.

@All

This is the last time I'll let Newt draw me into debate unless he can reform his ways and start contributing constructively to either prove or disprove Archer. I am foolish for having posted this time, but allow me to be hypocritical and suggest that the only way to shut him up will be to ignore him. This will be my line from now on. If I take particular offence to anything he says I will send a PM to him.

I will make a pact now with anyone who wishes to join me to let him run his mouth off without consequence from here on in hope he might just stop. He has clearly already run out of original things to say.

shakman

[Rusty_Springs]

I will agree with you, in partial. The electro-prototype proves part of the device. It shows you can continually shift rods to one side to obtain continual motion.

However, I must respectfully disagree with the leap and assumption that a perm mag version will work just because a electromag version worked.

In the electromag version, the stator coils can be switched on and off. This allows you to move the rods into position with absolutely no "wall" with the magnets off. Once the rods are in position, the coils are turned on, the rod is pushed, and the wheel turns. The energy we get by shifting the rods is the same energy we use when we turn on the coil.

In the perm mag version, the stator mags are always "on." The energy we get by shifting the rods is the same energy needed to break the wall.

I have said this many times before, just not in so few words. If AQ does succeed, then he has figured out a way to reduce the "wall" input energy while maintaining the same "lift" energy.

This would truly present an anomaly and defy our understanding of magnetism as a "conservative" force. However, I am already starting to question this by observation of Rusty's trigate.

While this is against part of our current paradigm, it has nothing to do with Newton and mechanical physics. It would go against E&M physics (electro & magnetism). We know this area is one of the "bumps" in our trail, hopefully these discoveries smooth things out! But I think AQ is picking a fight with the wrong dead guy, he should be duking it out with Faraday and Maxwell...

(In Mawell's defense though, his original works have been "adulterated" to exclude aether theory. Today, scientist are looking for a universal equation that includes the four major forces: gravity, electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear, but have been extremely unsuccessful. Maxwell had it in his original "equation," plus some "other" material, but it was broken apart into "equations" when that "other" material was not universally accepted. Well, this is the underground rumor at least.)

What we "know" will never be true. This ties into religion for me. We will never "know" God's laws. We see, observe, study, and analyze. We have gotten very close and accurate in our understanding and quantitative analysis for most things. We can use this understanding to design and build extraordinary things that work. This is what engineers do. Our paradigm is always changing. We are working up an endless mountain. To get the the top is to "know" all things, and this will never happen. Never.

-PurePower

Hi All
I just wanted to say what power is saying here is totally right and using outside energy to power a machine is not proof it will work with just permanent magnet, for those who don't beleave this look at an electric motor it works with an electromagnet but will it work with permanent magnets at this stage no and why because you can't turn permanent magnets on and off or in this case you can't switch from one pole to the next and back again.
I say at this stage because I have worked out a way to do just that with permanent magnets but will it work the same way? at this stage I don't know, it will change poles at the right time but will it keep spinning? again I don't know, it goes to, do magnets do work? if they do then it should be no different to an electric motor except powered by permanent magnet.
Take Care All
Graham

[Xaverius]

[quote author=exxcomm0n link=topic=4540.msg110021#msg110021 date=1215187

@ all

For those from the US, HAPPY 4th KIDS! (and be careful w/ the fireworks!)

For the rest of the world, I wish that the reason we (USA) celebrate the 4th (the idea all men should have equal rights and that less government is better) makes a quick and long lasting return to the USA and all other nations, regions, or locations on the earth, or anywhere else that man lives!

I think FE would be a BIG step in realizing my wish above.

(I hope to finish my HHO stuff today so I can start focusing on the wheel solely soon!)
[/quote]  Well said Excomm!!  Today is the birthday of our nation, the nation that  has upheld the rights of every man.  Free Energy can definitely help accomplish that which the sheeple, bankers, and politicians have failed at and that to which our founding fathers created.  Happy Birthday America!!

[Newtonian God]

@Newt

Wow, wouldn't you know it. Newt has made just over 50 posts and ALL of them have been negative, and none of them have been constructive. I was hoping I could find a reason not to put shit on him (again!) but I couldn't find one good reason (not even one). If you're going to run some sort of betting ring, it's a good idea to give people your real name mate. At least when I donate to Archer I can see where the cash is going every time I see his pics and his vids. I'll be sure that your little betting scam which you opened up with here gets followed up in every jurisdiction if/when Archer gets his wheel working.

You may be right on some points in your last post, admittedly I only started reading Archer's site after reading elsewhere about it. I am going on what I have read since I've been following and I never read anywhere that he claimed to have a working wheel and have always been under the impression that he had a toy, powered, electro-mag wheel. You could tell me he said anything before then and as far as I'm concerned it will be your word versus his from my point of view, unless either of you can prove otherwise.

So why do I support Archer you might ask? I looked at his idea and thought "this might just work". So whether or not Archer said he had a working OU wheel previously or not I think the idea has merit and Archer's willingness to build something to prove/disprove it makes me a keen supporter. Unless you have something constructive to show me I won't be listening.

Whether or not you are right about Archer's claims, and whether or not the alleged claims were true or false, as far as I'm concerned you're a broken record and you've just jumped the shark again. Please come back when you have something worthwhile to contribute. I can only assume by your posts so far that you are so threatened by the possibility that Archer may have discovered something here that you are trying to get this thread shut-down but repeating the same crap over and over. If this is not the case, I will let you stick your boot in one more time without reply if you promise that you won't post again until you have something constructive to add (negative or positive) and not just repeat what you've been saying for the last 10 posts. Or maybe you'll take a PayPal donation at Newtonian.God@gmail.com to STFU and give us some peace for research around here?

If you still feel the need to come back and pose the same questions over and over again, you need some serious help. I am sure I can get in touch with that psychiatrist for you.

@All

This is the last time I'll let Newt draw me into debate unless he can reform his ways and start contributing constructively to either prove or disprove Archer. I am foolish for having posted this time, but allow me to be hypocritical and suggest that the only way to shut him up will be to ignore him. This will be my line from now on. If I take particular offence to anything he says I will send a PM to him.

I will make a pact now with anyone who wishes to join me to let him run his mouth off without consequence from here on in hope he might just stop. He has clearly already run out of original things to say.

shakman

Just as I expected, instead of having a rational debate based on the facts you resort to attacking me once again. Why is it so hard for you to except the truth? Pull your head out of Archer's ass and open your eyes.

You say that all of my posts have been negative and none of them have been constructive. Can you please give me a single example of anything that you and your hero Archer have said in this thread that has been "constructive"?

The only broken record in this thread is the one about how perpetual motion is almost here. My pet hamster is just as close to achieving perpetual motion as Archer Quinn. And my hamster has not taken a single donation!

--
Newtonian God
"A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool." William Shakespeare

[fletcher]

I'll briefly cover my take on conservative forces ability to do work, [mentioned earlier] - particularly gravity & magnetism [permanent mags] - in my experience [IME] it depends on how you view what's going on - I'll try to explain what I mean, this is how over the years I have come to see it - you may or may not see the logic or relevance of this reference frame, but to me it makes perfect undeniable sense.

Both gravity & magnestism are fields of potential or gradients of potential, if you will - they cannot add or subtract energy to any object or mass within that field of influence - they are simply vehicles that allows an object to change its state from static motion to dynamic motion i.e. from Potential Energy to Kinetic Energy - at any point in between the start & the end of travel [A to B] the Total Energy is the same, being a combination of Pe+Ke - while the object is accelerated from A to B there is work done because its force applied over distance - this causes the acceleration of the object which leads to the depletion of Pe & the increase in Ke - but Total Energy is unchanged.

So work can be done when an object is placed in one of these two fields but because both types of fields are conservative to recycle the object requires that you physically have to provide the top-up energy to sustain the system, after ordinary system losses, of which we are very familiar.

So, IMO, when you combine two conservative forces to act together in synchronicity neither can "add energy" to any object which is an inherent part of that same system, just change the type of energy it displays to the observer - cobbling of these two forces, although looks interesting, is unable to achieve OU, simply because no energy was added to any object in the system - in fact, ambient energy escaped the system in the form of system losses leaving the closed system sub-OU i.e. requires an energy top-up to operate as OU.

The usual route is to then look closely at electro-magnetism & alternators, generators etc, as a means to break the wall or ramp friction effect - but electromagnetic systems are pretty inefficient so even if you have 90% efficiency you would still come up short of the system Potential Energy you require to sustain the system as OU - that's why systems once underway can't be disconnected from a battery source & self sustain their motion by providing their own energy top-up after ordinary & inescapable losses are accounted for.

In the final wash-up it comes down IMO to whether you think field potentials "add" energy to an object or not - clearly I don't believe so & why I believe quinn is so very wrong - accept it or reject it, that is your prerogative, but at least hear the argument so that it can be disproved rationally or by experimentation.