Originally posted by Frosty
You seem to have missed the point. You need to explain the math behind the mechanics. You are describing an application which goes against the three
laws of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics has never been proven, there is math behind the laws, and most improtantly: it has never been disproven. It is
accepted through out the world by all academia, their constituents and their students.
I think I got your point. You want me to present my math, and I am basically telling you that I have no math yet, and even if I did, I don't
necessarily need to post it to exchange ideas about this. For instance, I had some specific questions about ferrous materials. A poster was kind
enough to point me in the right direction. I don't see how presenting mathematics was important to that. Got it? K. On to the rest.
My second point has to do with thermodynamics. Would you say a Dam which produces hydro-electric power is over-unity? Probably not right? Why?
Because there was far more power put into the system than was produced, in the form of the sun hitting the earth, evaporating the oceans, creating
rain, which formed the river, which fed the lake, which fed the dam using gravity. . . You still with me?
Now, if I told you that I thought we could get a lot more power out of magnets than we put in, you would say that is absurd, but you would have no
footing to stand on (but neither would I). The reason why neither of us would be correct is because vs. the dam example, magnets get their force from
a source we are not aware of, and it is fairly continuous. Yes, a magnet wears out, but in the mean time, there is a field flow going on. Yes, it is
because of the alignment of particles, but what is it about that specific arrangement that causes magnetism? What exactly is magnetic flux? Do you
know enough about it to make a magnetic flux (without a magnet or electromagnet)? I thought not, and neither do I. But we can make water! Hydrogen
and Oxygen. That is a tangible thing that creates energy for us. So does magnetism, and in fact it is involved in that dam, but to this day no one
can explain on a fundamental level magnetic flux. No one can build a magnetic flux (without first creating a magnet or electromagnet). Even string
theory doesn't exactly answer it based on what I have read.
Think about those questions for a moment. Take away the magnet. Take away the electromagnet. Pretend they never existed, and never can exist, and
explain how you would go about building piece-by-piece a magnetic field. Some might try to get around my question by saying, "hey lets align a bunch
of atoms so they create magnetic field." That doesn't answer the question, and to say a force is fundamental is a ridiculous cop-out. How do you
build a force, any force? What's it made of?
Now I have absolutely no mathematical proof of this next tidbit, but it has occurred to me that all forces are the result of us passing either through
a higher dimension, or us passing through time, which itself might be a higher dimension. This is why time moves at a different pace when close to
large objects with enough gravity. I'll fully admit it is probably hooey, but there is nothing wrong with me asking about the nature of time,
gravity, mater, or anything else without first being asked for my scientific credentials. So again, not trying to get anyone upset or anything, but
at this point Frosty, I will present no math.
I may however present some models if I can get my 3D modeller to behave.