Re: permanent magnet motor

On Feb 17, 10:14 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
gdewi...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
The second law of thermodynamics prohibits the construction of a
perpetual motion machine "of the second kind."

There are two usual statements of this law.

Kelvin's formulation states that it is impossible for a system
operating in a cycle and in contact with one thermal reservoir to
perform positive work in the surroundings.

Clausius's formulation states that it is impossible for a system
operating in a cycle to produce positive heat flow from a colder body
to a hotter body.http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/SecondLawofThermodynamics.html

Holy nobelty William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin (aka - you can call me
Lord) is widely known from the scale of absolute temperature
measurement he claimed to have re-invented, Galileo Galilei invented a
rudimentary water thermometer in 1593. In 1714, Gabriel Fahrenheit
invented the first mercury thermometer, the modern thermometer.

VIP Kelvin also mentions: the conversion of heat (or caloric) into
mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered - but
a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory.

Here Mr Kelvin is measuring the impossible in doubts.

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." sad Lord Kelvin -
president of the Royal Society - 1895. Later crawled back by
antagonists into "technically impossible" because it was in his days.

Ptolemy believed the planets and Sun to orbit the in the order
Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. This system became known
as the Ptolemaic system.

nonexistence speculations are never factual, their description of
perpetual motion is not to be taken seriously in any way.

On http://www.ajayonline.us/we can read

Ajay is a crank.

That's like a last resort of argumentation. The ramifications of this
posting evolve around the fact you are in no position to make a claim
which you have no evidence for. you have - no - supporting evidence.
So you are making the irrational claims here. If you disagree you
should explain in detail what you mean with "crank". If you don't I
will point you at the words of Mr Johnson.

" If a particular law gets in the way, he sees no harm in going around
it for a while to see if there's something on the other side. Johnson
explains the persistent opposition he experiences from the established
scientific community this way: "Physics is a measurement science and
physicists are especially determined to protect the 'Law' of
Conservation of Energy. Thus the physicists become game wardens who
tell us what laws' we can't
violate. " I now claim: You are into pacman not physics. Unlike your
"crank" claim I do have evidence to back this claim up.

" Einstein did not derive it mathematically but in true sense
speculated it. "

In short he stole half then speculated the other half. (no math.)

Unlike you (the reader) I can say I've looked at every overunity
apparatus on the Internet I could find. You can-not claim you did this
as it takes months of work. From this research I have derived a far
less complicated magnet motor design. I'm not the only one who build
this. The list is very long, but in contrast I do disclose the
workings.

What you haven't done is understand the laws of thermodynamics.
Alternatively, you could construct your device and see first hand
than it doesn't work.

First hand would be looking at the spinning apparatus.

Second hand would be 1800 quotation

Third hand would be collective blind faith in the assumptions of
others.

In fact, you could go on for the rest of
your life trying to reduce this friction or that radiation, but
in the end, the device can't work. What you pursue is your choice.

Education is very valuable... especially the mathematics.

THINKING is valuable, if you can-not think knowledge is a novelty.

What you call knowledge is merely a reproduction of the thoughts of
others (Second hand)

the angular momentum is preserved on the primary and secondary wheels.

Because the net force is zero on the primary wheel

And because attraction and repulsion compliment another on the
secondary.

Now explain in the words of physics what is missing and/or why I am
wrong.

thanks in advance.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: permanent magnet motor
    ... There are two usual statements of this law. ... operating in a cycle to produce positive heat flow from a colder body ... invented the first mercury thermometer, ... You are into pacman not physics. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: permanent magnet motor
    ... Why don't you tell us how much math and physics you have had? ... So far you guys quoted me the laws of physics over and over again. ... There are two usual statements of this law. ... invented the first mercury thermometer, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: permanent magnet motor
    ... There are two usual statements of this law. ... invented the first mercury thermometer, ... You are into pacman not physics. ... Second hand would be 1800 quotation ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: What is the Standard Model
    ... >> physics, and don't get too hung up over what to call it. ... >> say, the ideal gas law, your understanding of it will not depend on the ... >> and Boyle's law, what constitutes an ideal gas, and that it can be derived ... The principle of relativity is a postulate. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: What is the Standard Model
    ... >> physics, and don't get too hung up over what to call it. ... >> say, the ideal gas law, your understanding of it will not depend on the ... >> and Boyle's law, what constitutes an ideal gas, and that it can be derived ... The principle of relativity is a postulate. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading