Re: non-looping smot

2005-05-14 Thread RC Macaulay
..considering the 3D graphics software available. Richard - Original Message - From: Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 11:56 PM Subject: RE: non-looping smot At 06:48 pm 13-05-05 -0400, Keith wrote: I hadn't really thought of that...a funny image

Re: non-looping smot

2005-05-14 Thread Grimer
I have been going through the posts on the Prometheus Yahoo site and I came across this one from a true believer, to wit, Dave Squires, which I thought was a good basis for further discussion. = I already know that OU is real. There is

Re: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Grimer
At 09:33 pm 12-05-05 -0400, you wrote: not used account wrote: For some reason, even the non-looping smot is still a little interesting... Yeah, especially if you can get 1.5 G for one! http://www.butlerlabs.com/2ftmagnapulsion.htm The SUPERSMOT! I had not heard of butler before I visited

RE: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Keith Nagel
Hi Frank, You should be aware that back in the mid 90's, _many_ people were encouraged by Greg to build and test these devices. I was not one of them, preferring my own insanity to others, but some are still on Vo. These devices started with Emil Hartman as far as I can tell, and they do work as

Re: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Harry Veeder
Is C of M true as well? Harry Keith Nagel at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Frank, You should be aware that back in the mid 90's, _many_ people were encouraged by Greg to build and test these devices. I was not one of them, preferring my own insanity to others, but some are still on Vo.

RE: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Grimer
At 11:10 am 13-05-05 -0400, Keith wrote: Hi Frank, You should be aware that back in the mid 90's, _many_ people were encouraged by Greg to build and test these devices. I was not one of them, preferring my own insanity to others, but some are still on Vo. These devices started with Emil

RE: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Keith Nagel
Frank writes: I don't think one has to go as far as having a circle of ramps. If the steel ball could transit a straight line of 100 SMOTS, say, that would be pretty convincing. What's the difference between 2 and 100? Nothing, IMHO. The challenge is curving the line back on itself. I have no

RE: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Grimer
At 04:09 pm 13-05-05 -0400, you wrote: Frank writes: I don't think one has to go as far as having a circle of ramps. If the steel ball could transit a straight line of 100 SMOTS, say, that would be pretty convincing. What's the difference between 2 and 100? Nothing, IMHO. Well if it will go

RE: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Keith Nagel
- From: Grimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 6:56 PM To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: RE: non-looping smot At 04:09 pm 13-05-05 -0400, you wrote: Frank writes: I don't think one has to go as far as having a circle of ramps. If the steel ball could transit a straight line

RE: non-looping smot

2005-05-13 Thread Grimer
Keith, I have had a look at Emil Hartman's 1980 patent (US4215330) http://l2.espacenet.com/dips/bnsviewer?CY=chLG= frDB=EPDPN=US4215330ID=US+++4215330A1+I+ and it appears from the drawing that

Re: non-looping smot

2005-05-12 Thread Terry Blanton
not used account wrote: For some reason, even the non-looping smot is still a little interesting... Yeah, especially if you can get 1.5 G for one! http://www.butlerlabs.com/2ftmagnapulsion.htm The SUPERSMOT! I had not heard of butler before I visited SONS.