Re: is the magnetic field really moving?

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:42:37 -0500 Terry L Hewett Sr
<terrylhewettsr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
| 
| <phil-news-nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
| news:g8khbs12i5s@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:46:15 -0500 Terry L Hewett Sr 
|> <terrylhewettsr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
|>
|> | A lever must have a fulcrum to be a lever. I'm going to stick with my

|> first
|> | assumption of flux. the core is more the lever than the fulcrum.
|>
|> Consider a hydraulic lift.  Where's the fulcrum?
| 
| hydraulic pump via torsion.

That's not a fulcrum.  It is a different device.


|> The need for a fulcrum is merely an effect of a particular mechanical 
|> model.
|> The flux is a part of electromagnetism.  If you have one you have the 
|> other
|> everywhere.
| 
| every mechanical model manmade and naturally occuring share this
fulcrum. to 
| truly see it's im****tance is to fully understand it's role within the 
| mechanism. it is the one relative thing to everything.

Of course there is something relative.  I would not consider the pump to
be that in the case of the hydraulic lift.  The pump is the primary power
source.  The "relative object" is the point where there is a change in
the relation****p of distance of movement and force.


| I say 9p temple 1 is a transformer transforming energies between mars
and 
| jupiter as a natural mechanism. The whole point is that just because we 
| don't see the apparent effects doesn't ignore the fact that it takes
place 
| with or without our understanding of it. Were like a bird on a wire.

The flux in a transformer is another form of power/energy.  The flux
exists
outside the transformer, as well.  The wires leading to, and from, also
have
the flux.  The core enhances the flux, but it can still be a transformer
even without the core.  My point is, the transformer is transforming the
flux.
It is not a case of flux being a reference thing.

The windings themselves are the closest thing you have to a reference
point
in a transformer.


|> So dismiss the idea of trying to find a fulcrum.  It's nothing more
than a
|> reference point of an asymmetric system.
|>
|> I'm still wondering what your invention does for me that a transformer 
|> cannot
|> besides having moving parts that would fail within a decade of
continuous 
|> use.
|>
| 
| Well hows freeing you from the grid sound? Freeing you from a costly
fuel 
| habit. eliminate the need for batteries. Imagine a world where
everything is 
| self powered. Do you understand what this technology can do for space 
| exploration? just in the capacity of supplying a pre determined voltage
for 
| potentially centuries. space travel could be a reality within your
expectant 
| decade of use. You got to love the byproducts of spinning mass and their

| apparent link to stabilization in space.

Are you saying this technology makes energy from nothing?  If so, I want
to
see some proof.  That _may_ be in the form of construction details clear
enough to actually construct it.  What your web page showed is far from
it.
Alternatively, show me all the materials used to construct it so I can see
that no energy storage device (battery, for example, or fuel) is involved,
and no otherwise consumable material is involved (unless it's as cheap as
dirt and doesn't require a lot).  Then construct it in isolation that
prevents
access to any other material or parts (if you want to hide from me how it
is
built).  Then show me how much power it produces, and lets run it for a
month
and see how much energy it can produce.

Otherwise, such a claim gets classified as the quackery it seems to be.

-- 
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked.  Due to
ignorance |
|         by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked.  If you post
to  |
|         Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP.    
   |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at
ipal.net) |