Blah blah blah
Trying for the big bailout already.
Changing the terms and conditions to suit your own need to be right.
But you have just found out that you are wrong again<--yes,again MH.

Brad

Bla bla my ass Dr. Brainfry.  Do your big reveal in two days showing how a magnet "dissipates energy."

Here is my definition of a magnet "dissipating energy:"  There is a continuous flow of heat power or electrical power due to the presence of the magnet and there are no external mechanisms that are adding power to the magnet itself.  In other words, no moving of the magnet, no aiming heat lamps at the magnet, no nothing.

What you seem to be saying is that a magnet just sitting there on a table is "dissipating energy" and for me "dissipating energy" means that somehow the magnet is allegedly a continuous source of some form of power.  I am stating this because with your serious language and communication issues, you could find some way to "weasel" your way into "being right."

No monkeyshines, no Bizarro World anti-logic.  No twisted obtuse spaghetti English that could be interpreted five different ways.  Make sentences that are properly constructed and comprehensible and not ambiguous.  No requirement for a secret decoder ring to understand what you are saying.  You have to be real.

author=MileHigh link=topic=8341.msg479834#msg479834 date=1460077518]



Oh-more terms and conditions to suit your needs MH

My English is just fine -thank you. But what has become outstanding in this thread,is your lack of knowledge in the simplest of thing's,and how much you have actually got wrong in this thread.
Then you do the old twisty turny thingy to try and weasel your way out of your own mistakes lol--but with epic fails all over the place.

Post 1340- Quote:  But the actual engine itself, the pistons, the valves, the camshaft, the crankcase, the ignition, etc, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with resonance.

Lol.

Post 1534 Quote: Good, so that patent shows a resonant cavity in the combustion chamber can be used to improve the performance of a two-stroke engine.  And you also put up a link showing how resonance in the cylinder of a typical four-stroke automobile engine reduces performance.  So there is no simple one-size-fits all answer and things have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.  So that one is a draw.

No MH-thats not a draw. Another attempt at avoiding the fact that you were once again wrong lol.
What that is,is showing you that you have no idea what you are talking about

Your claim once again- But the actual engine itself, the pistons, the valves, the camshaft, the crankcase, the ignition, etc, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with resonance.
So i post the very thing you say dose not exist-both good and bad,and you try and call it a draw lol.
No no no-it was another loss on your behalf--another false load of crap from you.
I show where resonance exist throughout an ICE,and how that resonance increases both efficiency and power,while you waffle on about how it dose not even exist lol.
Another epic fail on your behalf MH.

Here is my definition of a magnet "dissipating energy:"

Lucky for us,you do not get to make the definition of energy dissipation.
Energy is dissipated when work is being done. Work must be done to align the magnetic domains of a magnetic material<-- dont forget that one MH.

There is a continuous flow of heat power or electrical power due to the presence of the magnet

What a lot of crap. Since when dose a continuous flow of anything needed to show that work was done. If we switch on a light,and then switch it back of,so as the flow was not continuous,was work done?
Like i said,it is a good thing we dont go by your demented rules of work being done,or what dissipated energy is.

What you seem to be saying is that a magnet just sitting there on a table is "dissipating energy"

Thats not what i said at all. Dose a battery dissipate energy just sitting there with no interaction with anything else?.

and for me "dissipating energy" means that somehow the magnet is allegedly a continuous source of some form of power.  I am stating this because with your serious language and communication issues, you could find some way to "weasel" your way into "being right."

You need to go brush up on your energy dissipation example's.

You are going to fall into another of your holes you dug MH.


Brad

No MH-thats not a draw. Another attempt at avoiding the fact that you were once again wrong lol.
What that is,is showing you that you have no idea what you are talking about (http://overunity.com/Smileys/default/wink.gif)

Go ahead Brad and say that until you are blue in the face.  You have been wrong so many times over the years but you always got kid gloves and many times you were spoon fed the answers so you could understand what you were observing.  At least on this thread you will get the truth from me.  Go on any other thread and say any whackadoo thing you want, I don't care.

Yes, I was unaware that there are ways to take advantage of resonance in a cylinder during combustion, and also for getting better air flow into and out of the cylinders.  I never claimed to be an expert in engines.  So what are you going to do?  Jump up and down in a victory jig?  Have your jig and eat it too.

author=MileHigh link=topic=8341.msg479834#msg479834 date=1460077518]

 

So whats it going to be MH--Scope shot 1,or scope shot 2 for the attached schematic?

Are you going to side with TK,because he is your mate,and you dislike EMJ?
Or are you going to think for your self for once,and answer with what you think is correct.
!OR! are you not going to answer,as you have no idea your self how induction actually work's.

My guess is that you will say nothing--will not answer the question,as you just do not know,and do not want to make your self look any worse than you already do.

And where is that mate of yours-minnie,who said i need to brush up on my induction skill's


Brad

You show a transformer and you are too dense and too lazy to use the dot convention.  You have been reminded of that several times before.

Hey Brad,

Yes Sir, equal and opposite, but, there is a small catch here, reactive power can change the phase angle some! Which has nothing to do at all with Faradays Law or Lenz's Law.

This is Ping Pong Power, if an Ideal Inductor were considered, the power you put in, is the power you get out again. So properly interpreting your scope shots, you need to take into account the Phase angle on your Input.

To be correct and propper, I should correct my self some.

The phase angle difference, between Volts and Amps on the Input, actually is affected by Faradays Law or Lenz's Law!

Taking the concept of an Ideal Inductor, where all the Input Power (V * I * COS(ϕ)) is stored in the Magnetic Field (1/2 LI²), and then the Magnetic Field returnes all the Power again, is Electromagnetic Induction in its own right. So here I was not entirely correct in saying what I said.

In saying this, my meaning was from Source (Primary) Magnetic Field, to destination (Secondary) Magnetic Field. Which was the topic:

Brad, your scope shot shows the expected 90 degree phase difference as predicted by Faraday's Law: The induced (negative) EMF in the second coil is proportional to the _time rate of change_ of the inducing magnetic field from the first coil.
 

Which is totally WRONG, but I think I have said that about 4 or 5 times now...

As seen in the below Transformer Diagram, as stated, Input Current, to Output Current, resulting from Electromagnetic Induction, is 180 Degrees Out of Phase unless there is another source of Electromagnetic Induction that pushes the Phase Angle out. 

Appologies for my bad wording here.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Yes, I was unaware that there are ways to take advantage of resonance in a cylinder during combustion, and also for getting better air flow into and out of the cylinders.  I never claimed to be an expert in engines. So what are you going to do?  Jump up and down in a victory jig?  Have your jig and eat it too.

What i am going to do-and what i have done,is show people the truth,and not believe everything they are told. You just happened to be the example-a position you placed your self in.

You also continue with your insult's,and claim that i am always wrong-even though you admit your self that it is you that has been wrong so far on this thread in regards to resonant system's,and how those resonant systems increase the efficiency of the systems they are working in.

For many years now,you thought of your self as being above me--better than me,and yet here in this thread,we see that that is not the case. But still you continue to belittle me,and insult me as you see fit,and all based around the fact that i know some things you do not in the area you consider yourself to be so great at.

I have asked you and minnie twice now to answer a simple question,in an area yourself and minnie think i need to work on,and learn a bit more toward--that being induction.
But so far,neither of you have stepped up to the plate,and answered this simple question about induction--which scope trace is correct for the circuit schematic.

There is only one of two reason's neither of you will answer-
1-you do not know the correct answer yourselves-a simple question on induction-
2-you do not want to agree with what EMJ says about Lenz's law in relation to faraday's law of induction-simply because EMJ is saying it. This is just the cowards way out ,if that is the case.

So here it is once again-for you and minnie--the two that claim i need to brush up on my understanding of induction.
Is the first scope shot with the associated schematic correct?
Or is the second scope shot with associated scope shot correct.

1 is correct,one is not--which is it?.

I will add a little something for you to think about.
Both scope shot's are from the same circuit.
1 scope shot is the result of a PM (that can do no useful work )placed next to the transformer,and oscillating at the resonant frequency of that transformer,but where the field alignment dose not change.


Brad

In this thread you are being told the truth by me, no kid gloves and no spoon feeding.  If you are right then you are right and if you are wrong then you are wrong.  It's a shocking dose of reality for you.  Notice that is "dose" and not "does."

Am I perfect?  The answer is no.  Have I turned into a borderline psycho person because of this thread?  The answer is no.  Have you turned into a borderline psycho person because of this thread?  The answer is yes.

Keep on repeating I am wrong until you are blue in the face and your brain sizzles and smoke starts rising.  Go for it.

WOW, are you secretly a Politician?

Lies and Aviodances seems to be your primary area of expertese!!!

Certianly Electronics/Magnetics is not!!!

and still none of the Questions have been answered!!!


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org