Keep us tuned, but I somehow doubt that the fact of not pulling the charge from
earth ground will make much difference, as surely the charge your VDG sphere
can store must be negligible compared to the reported 0.5 to 1.0 MegaCoulombs
excess negative charge of the earth, have you worked it out?
Interesting, can you provide the exact formula, and what are the absolute
dielectric constant and the breakdown voltage strength (max V/m) for barium
titanate?
Indeed atmospheric ingress can be an important factor, since the material seems
to be a porous ceramic. The size of the pores, and the
http://www.laptop.org/laptop/hardware/highlights.shtml
Beautiful :)
--
Michel
It can't have been that challenging?
No comments? No calculations?, No disagreements?
Was it not understood?
Yes the force should be very small (incidentally the same trick could be
used for free energy, instead of 2 magnets, a primary and secondary with
unidirectional coupling) but it is
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Mon, 29 Jan 2007 10:04:52 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
Interesting, can you provide the exact formula, and what are the absolute
dielectric constant and the breakdown voltage strength (max V/m) for barium
titanate?
The exact formula is derived from the capacitance
On 1/29/07, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.laptop.org/laptop/hardware/highlights.shtml
Beautiful :)
Automatic peer-to-peer wireless connectivity? Virii will spread
faster than AIDS.
The magnet moving towards the loop will induce the opposite voltage in the
loop, as .0001 volts
induced in the opposite direction is enough to reverse the current direction
in the SC loop the magnet will basically not be attracted at all.
Except
Where did this [kinetic energy] come from? Simply the energy you put into the
loop to
establish the magnetic field.
I don't know, do we have to put energy into a positive charge so that it gets
attracted to a negative charge? (we must not forget that the magnetic force
from a moving charged
Michel Jullian wrote:
Your new experiment (attraction rather than
alignment) simplifies things somehow (no
torque, just linear acceleration), but let's stick to
the non-wire-resistive loop shall
we, it makes things simpler, and closer to the
electron orbit or spin counterpart you are
How can you produce an opposing voltage in a _closed_ non-resistive current
loop?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using *standard* physics
Michel Jullian
A very interesting paper by two groups, Department of Physics, University of
Newcastle and Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Leicester.
For those that might have the slightest interest..
www.ips.gov.au/IPSHosted/STSP/meetings/aip/fred/fred.htm
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In short, I think I would be betting on the Li ion batteries. ;)
In short, I think you will be loosing that bet g.
I hope your loss is not as great as Sony's recent $ 175 million
quarterly loss on an older lithium technology, soon to push half a
billion
Never mind, let's assume you're right. How can you draw energy more than once
from this, or from a falling weight?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 5:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using
Michel Jullian wrote:
Never mind, let's assume you're right. How can you
draw energy more than once from
this, or from a falling weight?
From what-- magnetic dipole moment, charged space, or
what? If two magnetically
attracted current loops move closer then energy is
moved away from the
Let's say from a falling weight, if that's ok with you.
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using *standard* physics
Michel Jullian wrote:
Never mind, let's
Why I think an isolated-charged conductor (Sphere or Cylinder)
partially surrounded by a conductor (Sphere or Cylinder)
of opposite charge will repel the earth's charge.
http://f3wm.free.fr/sciences/jefimenko.html
In spite of your skepticism Michel:
F = k*q*Q/height^2 newtons. :-)
Fred
Michel Jullian wrote:
Let's say from a falling weight, if that's ok with
you.
Are we going back to gravity? We know less about
gravity than magnetic electric fields.
Perhaps when we are able to create an
electro-gravity coil we'll better understand
gravity. Until then I predict it will
Michel Jullian wrote:
Never mind, let's assume you're right. How can you draw energy more than once
from this, or from a falling weight?
Michel
You could periodically generate power from a bodies weight, if you could
electrically modulate the body's weight while it is sitting on a spring,
Ok, electric then. Can you draw energy more than once from the coulombic
attraction of a charged body of say +1 coulomb accelerating towards a fixed
equal and opposite charge? I mean for example:
- How much energy E do you retrieve by releasing it from 1m away and stopping
it 1cm away? (say
Fred I agree with your formula for like charges, but only if the totality of
the Earth's charge is kind enough to come right under your VDG, which may be
difficult since it will be repelled by it.
What is more likely IMHO is that your VDG's charge, much lower but much more
concentrated than
Michel Jullian wrote:
Ok, electric then. Can you draw energy more than
once from the coulombic attraction of
a charged body of say +1 coulomb accelerating towards
a fixed equal and opposite charge? I
mean for example:
- How much energy E do you retrieve by releasing it
from 1m away and
Michel Jullian wrote.
Fred I agree with your formula for like charges, but only if the totality
of the Earth's charge is kind enough to come right under your VDG, which
may be difficult since it will be repelled by it.
What is more likely IMHO is that your VDG's charge, much lower but much
I suppose that's one way to look at it. Does this allow you to find E - E' ?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using *standard* physics
Michel Jullian wrote:
On 1/30/07, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where did this [kinetic energy] come from? Simply the energy you put
into the loop to
establish the magnetic field.
I don't know, do we have to put energy into a positive charge so that it
gets attracted to a negative charge? (we must not
Fred,
Is your set-up capable of detecting either
an increase or a decrease in weight?
Harry
What I don't know is whether the gained kinetic energy is equal to the energy
you put into the loop to
establish the magnetic field, but this may be true I just haven't worked it out.
What if both magnets are permanent ones, you don't have to put energy in do you?
Michel
- Original Message
Oh I think I understand at last your reasoning: in this case in your view
energy is conserved because the field energy decreases while the kinetic energy
increases. Whereas in the case of the two permanent magnets _both_ the field
energy and the kinetic energy increase, so you think there is a
27 matches
Mail list logo
