The bistander thread

[bistander]

Hello all,

Aaron has asked me to start my own thread so I do so here. I'll post my opinions and comments here with links to the source material. Feel at ease to use this thread if you desire.

Regards,

bi

Ref:

...
You and iamnuts have until the end of next week to post a link to a linkedin profile, or something else showing your background in these matters because otherwise, you're both anonymous cowards shouting nonsense from the peanut gallery with your bullhorns - if you have one iota of confidence about the cynical drivel that you're so proudly ooze all over this thread, stop hiding behind a username. Deadline is March 16. The only exception is to start your own thread and post your nonsense there. You cannot state your point of what you want to see any more than you already have and no further post from either of you will add to that. 300 watts in and 2kw out? Not one more post will add to or emphasize that any more so post a new thread or leave.

Obviously I want to remain anonymous. I believe one should be judged by the content of their posts, not by reputation or popularity. Please respect this. As always, I encourage fact checking and research opposed to acceptance at face value.

Thanks.

[bistander]

Note to Turion

...
Want a cheap metal cylinder as a heat sink? Dimes, pennies, nickles and quarters are all non-magnetic. I don’t know which would make the BEST heat sink. I’m hoping for pennies stacked together since they would be cheapest.

That will give Eddy currents a place to flow and produce heat and counter torque.

[Iamnuts]

Hi bistander.

Do you think Purcell gives a reasonable description of electro magnetic induction?
To my mind,if that’s the case,there is no way in which any combination of
magnets and wire can yield more out than in.
It surely then must follow that action-reaction is always going to hold true.
I looked at Eric Dollard’s piece on capacitors (when I was a lad they were
called condensers) and I don’t really understand what dielectric lines of force
are. Can you point me to an authoritative link to same?
I’m quite happy with science as it is,so much of the stuff we use these days
has got its roots in the basic principles and it all seems to work so well.
Of course there’s a whole heap more to be discovered, just a pity I won’t
be around to see it.
John.

[bistander]

Looks like it

Do you think Purcell gives a reasonable description of electro magnetic induction?
To my mind,if that’s the case,there is no way in which any combination of
magnets and wire can yield more out than in.
It surely then must follow that action-reaction is always going to hold true.
I looked at Eric Dollard’s piece on capacitors (when I was a lad they were
called condensers) and I don’t really understand what dielectric lines of force
are. Can you point me to an authoritative link to same?
I’m quite happy with science as it is,so much of the stuff we use these days
has got its roots in the basic principles and it all seems to work so well.
Of course there’s a whole heap more to be discovered, just a pity I won’t
be around to see it.
John.

Hi John,

I haven't been able to study either document near as much as I intend. What I've read and see so far, neither negate conventional theory. In fact, Eric talks about iron filings and the magnetic lines of force. I've not studied Eric's stuff much, but I gather he is his own authority.

A lot of talk here on this forum about dielectric fields. To me, a dielectric is an electric insulator which can be polarized by an electric field. Electric fields or electric lines of force can arrange light wheat shaft along those lines. Lines of force in electric or magnetic fields just help us visualize that which is invisible yet interacts with charges, materials and other fields.

Just my opinions.

bi

[ilandtan]

Hi John,

I haven't been able to study either document near as much as I intend. What I've read and see so far, neither negate conventional theory. In fact, Eric talks about iron filings and the magnetic lines of force. I've not studied Eric's stuff much, but I gather he is his own authority.

A lot of talk here on this forum about dielectric fields. To me, a dielectric is an electric insulator which can be polarized by an electric field. Electric fields or electric lines of force can arrange light wheat shaft along those lines. Lines of force in electric or magnetic fields just help us visualize that which is invisible yet interacts with charges, materials and other fields.

Just my opinions.

bi

Bi you might look a with a wider angle, as you can associate the dielectric as an insulator at a greater magnitude. For example the Earth and Sky as plates, where that inbetween is an insulator a dielectric until there is a breakdown through that insulator and you have lightning. The Earth has capacity to store energy.

What Dollard said was interesting because he saw that both the Inductor and Capacitor store energy, but they were two different facets of manipulating the geometry of force lines of a field. It's kind of interesting, I don't necessarily swallow the whole enchilada but I can chew it for a while and see if I like it. I might not be capable of understanding, but the thing is keeping an open mind.

I am entertaining the notion that a transmitting coil can be plate, and a receiving coil can be a plate. Distance is the insulator, but you can still transfer power from one to the other. We are so limited in our understanding of the nothing between everything, and it might be mechanics of dimension that we see as the tip of the iceberg.

[BroMikey]

A lot of talk here on this forum about dielectric fields. To me, a dielectric is an electric insulator which can be polarized by an electric field. Electric fields or electric lines of force can arrange light wheat shaft along those lines. Lines of force in electric or magnetic fields just help us visualize that which is invisible yet interacts with charges, materials and other fields.

Just my opinions.

bi

You are making claims that you know about these fields so I want to
see proof of your findings. Do you experiment on the bench? Or are all
of your conclusion's based off of what someone else has already found?

Please post any form of on the bench test results that proves your
statements about charge and fields.

I am watching the results with my test bed and know beyond a doubt.

More out than in is all around.

[bistander]

I do this

Bi you might look a with a wider angle, as you can associate the dielectric as an insulator at a greater magnitude. For example the Earth and Sky as plates, where that inbetween is an insulator a dielectric until there is a breakdown through that insulator and you have lightning. The Earth has capacity to store energy.

What Dollard said was interesting because he saw that both the Inductor and Capacitor store energy, but they were two different facets of manipulating the geometry of force lines of a field. It's kind of interesting, I don't necessarily swallow the whole enchilada but I can chew it for a while and see if I like it. I might not be capable of understanding, but the thing is keeping an open mind.

I am entertaining the notion that a transmitting coil can be plate, and a receiving coil can be a plate. Distance is the insulator, but you can still transfer power from one to the other. We are so limited in our understanding of the nothing between everything, and it might be mechanics of dimension that we see as the tip of the iceberg.

Also the wide angle of the dynamos surrounding us.

[bistander]

What?

You are making claims that you know about these fields so I want to
see proof of your findings. Do you experiment on the bench? Or are all
of your conclusion's based off of what someone else has already found?

Please post any form of on the bench test results that proves your
statements about charge and fields.

I am watching the results with my test bed and know beyond a doubt.

More out than in is all around.

I stated clearly those were "just my opinions". Not claims of fantastic unbelievable performance where one would be expected to provide proof.

Please do not post on this thread.

[BroMikey]

I stated clearly those were "just my opinions". Not claims of fantastic unbelievable performance where one would be expected to provide proof.

Please do not post on this thread.

All I am saying is if you are going to be making statements that seem
like you are calling fact you should be able to show them on a bench.

And don't give me that "Plz don't post" stuff. Back it up is all I am
saying. Really all I have to say. If you are going to talk put some
action behind it or it's just a copy and paste nothing burger.

[Iamnuts]

Photon.

https://youtu.be/s6RAZw2ocsg

This might do some good for someone.
John

[bistander]

Recent post

... extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. ...

Thank you jimboot

[bistander]

Cogging again

...
The attraction of a rotor magnet to the iron in a coil core can be offset by a magnet on the stator aligned to a magnet on the opposite side of the rotor in repulsion. Simple physics.
not extraordinary (which in NO WAY affects the induction caused by the passing magnetic field of the magnet) therefore when it is loaded it in NO way affects the motor turning the rotor. This has been proven by dozens of people and is the BASIS for the Tesla patent I linked to.
not extraordinary ...

The attraction of the rotor magnet to the iron is cogging. Yes, you can offset cogging. But you, yourself, claiming assistance from Tesla's works, state "which in NO WAY affects the induction caused by the passing magnetic field of the magnet". RIGHT. At last. It (the cogging neutralization) does not affect the induction caused by the passing magnetic field of the magnet. Meaning the passing magnet still induces a voltage on the coil as it moves past the coil (and core). That is the generated voltage. If a load is connected to the coil, then a current will flow powering the load. This current reacts with the magnetic flux and causes a force or torque in this case which opposes rotation. This opposing torque increases the load on the prime mover.

To Turion and all,

Don't take my word for it, study how generators work from an accredited source, like a textbook, University based website, even Wikipedia.

And I'm not making any incredible claims. Only stating fact from hundreds of years of science.

Regards,

bi

[Iamnuts]

Advice.

Turion has dug himself into a hole. The best thing to do in that situation is
to stop digging. He ought to retract the claim until he’s able to support it with robust evidence.
Generators work basically as a result of relativity and I don’t see much scope
in being able to enhance the process.
There must have been billions of electrical devices built by mankind and as far
as I know they always follow the rules.
Some of the cream of physicists never went near a laboratory yet they were
able to make huge advances in their particular field of research.
I would like nothing more tha Turion’s claim to be bona fide.
I don’t want to hide from anything I say and if anyone is interested I’m quite
willing to reveal my identity, just send PM.
John.

[Iamnuts]

Induction.

Faraday's law and relativity
Edit
Faraday's law describes two different phenomena: the motional EMF generated by a magnetic force on a moving wire (see Lorentz force), and the transformer EMF this is generated by an electric force due to a changing magnetic field (due to the differential form of the Maxwell–Faraday equation). James Clerk Maxwell drew attention to the separate physical phenomena in 1861.[21][22] This is believed to be a unique example in physics of where such a fundamental law is invoked to explain two such different phenomena.[23]

Einstein noticed that the two situations both corresponded to a relative movement between a conductor and a magnet, and the outcome was unaffected by which one was moving. This was one of the principal paths that led him to develop special relativity.[24]

Applications
Edit

[Iamnuts]

You ought to watch this.

https://youtu.be/P_jGMD304N8

Enjoy!
John.