Re: is the magnetic field really moving?

----------------------------
"Terry L Hewett Sr" <terrylhewettsr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:g9jiag$jht$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Don Kelly" <dhky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:Dl2vk.243605$gc5.190048@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ----------------------------
>> "Terry L Hewett Sr" <terrylhewettsr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:g9heho$8s1$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> "Don Kelly" <dhky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:IiMuk.138522$nD.3978@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> I am no less than a mechanical genius. you will fare well to
understand 
>>> that. If I publish that i have discovered a simplified process to 
>>> supercool a permanent magnet than that's what we have. Again If i 
>>> publish i have in effect discovered the process to compress or 
>>> manipulate the permanent magnetic field in such a way that it 
>>> essentially is compressed than allowed to expand that is what we have.

>>> If I go furthur and state that the mechanical process actually mirrors

>>> the refridgeration and airconditioning process than it should be 
>>> considered as absolute.
>>>
>>> In case you don't understand don and it is apparent that you don't 
>>> understand. the physics that you cherish and hold dearly is mearly
mans 
>>> interpretation of a mechanical or series of mechanical events observed

>>> to date. in short your understanding of physics is limited to others 
>>> observations of a mechanical process. My understanding on the other
hand 
>>> is based on the observations of the mechanism as a whole. My level of 
>>> understanding in the field of physics is at the core level. I fully 
>>> understand what is going on in the universe and how these things come 
>>> about. can you make that claim don? If not? Why not?
>> -----------------------------------
>> I can't make that claim for 2 reasons:
>> a)I know enough to know the limits of my knowledge.
>> b) I am not God.
>
> a) There is no such limits to knowledge. Only the ones we set 
> individually.
> b) You don't have to be god.
>
> You are free to seek knowledge unabated. We are in the information age
and 
> your obviously connected. It is ok to question my claims and seek
answers 
> elsewhere. It's ok to confront me with your findings.

You have given nothing- absolutely nothing which sup****ts your
contentions- 
Your understanding of magnetic devices and energy conversion is almost 
infinitesimal in spite of your 28 years installing and repairing A/C 
equipment (which really has not
>
>
>
>>
>> Not only BS and hand waving but an elevated sense of one's own 
>> superiority. Dear "God", please forgive a mere mortal for daring to 
>> question your pronouncements (even if you haven't deigned to provide
any 
>> back up for your statements).
>>
>> So, "God", it appears that now you have changed me from "agnosticism"
to 
>> "athiesm" as I don't believe your nonsense.
>>
>> Bye
>> -- 
>
> Put up or shut up don! Answer my questions!
------
Why
>
> Really don what makes you think that i would publish so adamantly a
bunch 
> of
> unverifiable bs? Are my claims easily dismissed given reasonable
> consideration?
------
Not originally when they were worth some thought , but as they went on,
and 
actually grew wilder, without any adequate response to questions, and
showed 
what appears to be an abyssmal lack of understanding, on your part, of 
electromagnetic devices  and permanent magnets in particular- the time for

consideration is gone. As far as publi****ng- this forum doesn't count. 
Believe me, a peer review would  be far more critical than I am- provided 
you could get a review on anything but Keelynet and even there, it would
be 
a bit unlikely. Your only hope is to build a device and have it properly 
tested (videos arent evidence) by a competent external lab.  When you have

this done satisfactorily, then good for you. However it will have to be up

to someone else to explain the "science" involved because you  cannot.
--------
Would my claims in terms of *seeming as a violation* cover a
> small band of overall physics or a broad band of overall physics?
------
Not seemingly
---------
Are the
> violations few or many?
--
many
-----
In the event that i am 100% correct in my claims
> would it effect physics as it is understood mildly or radically?
----
Nobel prize for sure.
---------
 >Could
 academia benifit from a higher level of understanding of overall physics?
--------
Of course - but you don't even speak the language of physics and have not 
offered any higher level of understanding.
> Would key laws be involved such as conservation of energy?
----
Yes
----
Are just a few
> known principles conflicting with my claims or many?
----
many
-----
 I'm just saying that
> there are many pieces to the puzzle of natural physics. In terms of
> understanding or a commonwealth of knowledge we are as infants. we only 
> have
> the borders defined. the bulk of the puzzle is vastly unknown. We lack
the
> key to the puzzle.
----------
I can agree with that statement.
-
> Here i represent that very key and don kelly dismisses it as BS and hand
> waving; BAH!

---------
Sorry, you  have presented nothing which is a key to any knowledge.
What else have you presented? Some unlabelled diagrams, some unknown and 
unspecified force causing your ring to rotate and then produce energy from

some combination of permanent magnets and coils ( the basis of hundreds of

failed perpetual motion devices on some concept that permanent magnets are
a 
net energy source- they aren't) and some superconductive claim for a 
permanent magnet (and no indication, much less explanation,  of what 
supercooling a magnet is supposed to do).

Please take your dried frog pills and have a nice nap.
-- 

Don Kelly dhky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 the X to answer