Generating more meaningful debate

[john.smith]

@AB

It is true to say experiments tell a greater story.

Maths guide just quicker and with less cut fingers.

Regards

agor95,
AB Hammer's favorite quote is that "only building will tell". This is why we do not get along. He does not allow for open discussion. This is just another example.

@AB Hammer,
I see where the V.A. has taught you to think since you had your head injury. Still, I don't think that gives you an excuse to cause me problems. This is why you've always told me that you have it worse than I do.
I think this is why you have problems, you've used it to get away with things that other people can't. And in the end you haven't learned how to be responsible. You are capable of learning if you feel like it. And to be in this forum it would've helped you IMHO.

[rlortie]

I logged off last night after reading the last post by Silvertiger containing the following statement:

How can you claim no one will find pm with physics if you don't understand physics nor wish to learn it? So what, exactly, are the "basics" then? Mechanics alone?

This has gnawed upon me until now, this being my first opportunity to respond.

i believe I have created a misconception of myself! After attending many state college courses, my education gained in the military and 22 years of employment as a mechanical/ structural engineer, advancing my education, achieving recognition as a a Civil engineer. The Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) should qualify me to say that I do acknowledge basic physics!

My mind is not closed to understanding nor increasing knowledge of physics.

The "Claim" I have intended to make is that iMO no one is is going to find Bessler's secret glued in a book of physics that cannot make a proof example better than an ice skater pulling in her arms.

I interpret this example (Stated here previously under different wording) as a concentration of mass/density by reducing the radius and circumference of of the skater. Mechanical speaking this leads to asking: What happens if we pull all the weights in simultaneously? Does wheel velocity increase? This is a hypothetical question, we will worry about where the force to accomplish this comes from after agreeing on an answer.

Ralph

[AB Hammer]

@AB

It is true to say experiments tell a greater story.

Maths guide just quicker and with less cut fingers.

Regards

agor95,
AB Hammer's favorite quote is that "only building will tell". This is why we do not get along. He does not allow for open discussion. This is just another example.

@AB Hammer,
I see where the V.A. has taught you to think since you had your head injury. Still, I don't think that gives you an excuse to cause me problems. This is why you've always told me that you have it worse than I do.
I think this is why you have problems, you've used it to get away with things that other people can't. And in the end you haven't learned how to be responsible. You are capable of learning if you feel like it. And to be in this forum it would've helped you IMHO.

john.smith AKA James Lindgaard's lies and BS fabraction in red.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-3Iq3XQkAw

[john.smith]

I logged off last night after reading the last post by Silvertiger containing the following statement:

How can you claim no one will find pm with physics if you don't understand physics nor wish to learn it? So what, exactly, are the "basics" then? Mechanics alone?

This has gnawed upon me until now, this being my first opportunity to respond.

i believe I have created a misconception of myself! First off after attending many state college courses, my education gained in the military and 22 years of employment as a mechanical/ structural engineer, advancing my education, achieving recognition as a a Civil engineer. The Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) should qualify me to say that I do acknowledge basic physics!

My mind is not closed to understanding nor increasing knowledge of physics.

The "Claim" I have intended to make is that iMO no one is is going to find Bessler's secret glued in a book of physics that cannot make a proof example better than an ice skater pulling in her arms.

I interpret this example (Stated here previously under different wording) as a concentration of mass/density by reducing the radius and circumference of of the skater's mass. Mechanical speaking this leads to asking: What happens if we pull all the weights in simultaneously? Does wheel velocity increase? This is a hypothetical question, we will worry about where the force to accomplish this comes from after agreeing on an answer.

Ralph

rlortie,
I have done many builds so what I say is based on a combination of building and having studied physics. This is also why I suggested someone trying a demonstration.
You might not be alone in not understanding how CoAM works. It may take for my build to work for people to seriously consider what I've been saying.
A couple of other forum members have acknowledged that CoAM is an accepted principle in physics that has been demonstrated.
And yet without the disc around the axle that might not matter.

[eccentrically1]

At least we had a few pages of meaningful debate.

[AB Hammer]

Using the ice skater example of pulling in her arms. One must consider the amount of energy used to bring the arms in as well. When I was young I used to roller skate and would do the spin in some of my dances and from experience it take a bit of energy to bring in your arms and if you leave them out. Your blood starts to build up a lot of pressure in your hands and finger tips. Not to mention it was painful.

[rlortie]

john.smith,

Your above post is a waste of space! It holds no reference what so ever to the simple question I asked.

Is this how you were taught to evade physics as you understand them?

Are you overjoyed that I did not include: What happens to torque, Am, inertia, kinetic energy, Cf and Cp etc.....

[eccentrically1]

The answer to your question is yes, the wheel velocity would increase.

[john.smith]

john.smith,

Your above post is a waste of space! It holds no reference what so ever to the simple question I asked.

Is this how you were taught to evade physics as you understand them?

Are you overjoyed that I did not include: What happens to torque, Am, inertia, kinetic energy, Cf and Cp etc.....

I like the way you're attacking me when I already answered the question. You have no problem with rlortie rejecting accepted science because he was a Civil Engineer. He did not demonstrate what that has to do with this topic, IE. Perpetual Motion. AB Hammer claims he has 30 years of engineering experience as well and neither one posts their work like I do.
The wheel will not be accelerated by the ascending weight. It's torque will remain constant. With 2x the velocity it is also 50% closer to the axle. Because it is more energetic it's relative mass decreases.
@rlortie, since you and your friend AB Hammer have no work to show (IMHO) wouldn't this make you both arm chair philosophers ?
You both reject all the testing and building I've done over the last 10 years.
Usually this would be funny but where else does someone get ridiculed for showing their work ? I guess some people want to protect credibility they haven't earned.

[agor95]

@All a Meaningful debate

I am creating a thread in the Off Topic section.

Can you place a post with your skills?

We have various levels and scope of abilities.

So it would be good to have them in one place.

I for one have been talked down to by IT support desks in my time.
No fault on their part, just a lack on information on my skill level.

Regards

[john.smith]

@John Collins,
This is IMHO. When rlortie said that math and science is armchair philosophy this is because he couldn't say the disc around the axle is just that. After all that is what Bessler said. And at the moment I think I have much more building experience than anyone else.
With AB Hammer and rlortie needing to protect their credibility I don't think a good discussion is possible. If so then when I said that CoAM and the disc around the axle work together they might have considered that possibility. Then they would've been showing why they are forum leaders. But they couldn't do that.

[AB Hammer]

john.smith akd James Lindgaard
Post your BS and lies on your own string.
Or I'll just repost it on your own string otherwise.

Time to flush https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-3Iq3XQkAw

[john.smith]

AB Hammer,
At the end of the day you and rlortie are not building because both of you have medical problems. You have stated that you need a 100% disability rating before you can build. My medical situation is more serious than yours or rlortie's is yet I am building.
I think this is funny because you're saying I am posting B.S. while rlortie is refuting well researched science. And if he wants he can say my building is worthless because that is armchair philosophy while it is actual work. yet you will say this is B.S. because that is all you have anymore.

[agor95]

AB Hammer's favorite quote is that "only building will tell"

You know I see nothing wrong with the quoted statement.
regardless to who stated it first.

@AB @rlortie

Each member stands on their contributions - lets focus on that in this thread.

That also goes for all builders physical and virtual.

Regards

[john.smith]

agor95,
I've got it figured out. I could show how the retraction mechanism works but my efforts don't count.
I consider ab hammer to be a fraud. He has not explained how something he has built is meant to work perpetually.
An example of his work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueh2sJXHmG0
Sorry but I do need surgery and I do believe he is willing to discredit me. He IMHO wants people to think there is something to be learned from his work. And as his friend rlortie posted, math is a waste of time. Neither one has contributed anything to my work.

p.s., as I've posted before, I do think it's nice of me to show my work in here because there are those who would like to see it.

edited to add; another way of looking at it, why would people be against working with me ? it might all be about bragging rights and not who helped to realize Bessler's work. You know, who's better, etc.