On Jun 27, 2009, at 9:14 PM, John Berry wrote:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Horace Heffner
<[email protected]> wrote:
Sure, I have a view. If you feel the idea has merit I think you
should more fully write up your idea, add any diagrams that might
be relevant, and include any formulas or computations you think are
relevant, and post it on your web site for posterity. Better yet
would be to publish.
I have no site, and no interest in publishing.
No interest in experimenting either? If so, then what's left
besides idle talk?
I do have an interest in discussion.
I avoid what I think are likely to be open ended discussions these
days because I do not have time for them.
Not to mention since the idea is already presented with diagrams
and math and a claimed replication by this "nayado" then any claims
I make a decade after his website appeared will be redundant and
appear I am trying to take credit for an idea that wasn't mine.
(there may be a record pre-dating his site on vort but who cares)
I don't see how any of the material of yours you reference
(assuming it is the material you last posted in this thread) is
relevant to the "vortex balls" thread
Only to the point that understanding either involves appreciating
the fact that magnetic fields are somewhat relative.
Only in the most general sense as far as I can see. I don't see
where you applied anything to the Marinov motor. It appears to me
your post is just way out in left field. I see no way to comment with
the "vortex balls" context at all.
I'll start a new thread on it in a day or 2 with the improvements
you suggest.
You might want to take a look at:
http://www.geoc ities.com/nayado/ [note - fill in any spaces in
this URL]
Also, there are many physics books that deal with special relativity
(not just the notion that all motion is relative) and why the
magnetic field is an artifact of the electrostatic field.
I've done some not resolved work in the relative charge motion arena
myself. One example:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/SR-CircleCoil.pdf
It is an arena for unlimited thought, discussion, and hard work.
I'm far from eager to get involved in discussion of it at this time.
, or why I should be singled out to comment.
Simply because I know you know enough to do so, or so I believe,
it's a compliment.
Intentionally or not, the combined effect of posting irrelevant
material on a thread and then calling out an individual to comment on
it is less like that of a compliment than it is like a troll.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
