Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL  (Read 123451 times)

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #165 on: June 14, 2021, 02:34:42 PM »
LOL, what a twit. This forum has long been in need of moderation, oversized photos and links and this kind of behavior from a senior member just reinforces the impression that this a junkyard.




lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #166 on: June 14, 2021, 02:41:31 PM »
reply #98


Conclusion:


Some people are naive,Some others  are  often called "idiots" in  science.Some of that "idiots" want to look educated  so they go to forum and "shine ...."Some of them are not so much idiots  it is  just money  making them active in  trashing  level  of this forum .But how come lankaIV was able  to  be fooled that much to start believe in that nonsense.How it  was possible ?Simple question lankaIV can you find me  just one patent  of fake PhD Slobodian Andrey can you.. ? For example I'm giving you two random  patents that have never  been approved:https://patents.google.com/patent/US20050173996A1/enhttps://patents.google.com/patent/US7095126B2/en[/size]- just  because   perpetual motion  and OU is not patentable.




Repl + 100
the second, technical standart application : 2006 granted     " and OU is not patentable."Jesse McQueenhttps://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/038476291/publication/US7095126B2?q=pn%3DUS7095126B




 patent office peers stupid ? patent peers idiots ?




Wesley and his statement related science/God :


really "dangerous" in consequence without to know what "God" means and the expression metaphoric use  !


Quantum physicians and their believe !


an example : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_and_Beyond


Keely notes ,theosophic literature are really not the right map for constructive mind mapping and a "well" believe by practical use :


                                                                          as NORM


an investor company today which no delivers something as market-able product in a relatively short,over-view able time,during this time by real basic object improvement ,will not long survive,by own investors monetary feed-back interests !




nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #167 on: June 14, 2021, 02:48:36 PM »
Yea Wesley boi wondered how lanca (so "smart") could've fallen for that trap, since he is not one of those "forum idiots" :) Wesley who cannot even grasp the simple 4th law of motion or lanca for whom 250w in 20kw out is 98% efficiency  :)

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #168 on: June 14, 2021, 02:56:39 PM »
Yea Wesley boi wondered how lanca (so "smart") could've fallen for that trap, since he is not one of those "forum idiots" :) Wesley who cannot even grasp the simple 4th law of motion or lanca for whom 250w in 20kw out is 98% CARNOT-FACTOR  efficiency  :)


Yo  :)

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #169 on: June 14, 2021, 03:00:22 PM »

Yo  :)

You mean carrot efficiency? :)

Good Morning,
20 000 / 250 = work C.O.P. 80
1- ( 250/20 000)= 0,9875 the process efficiency ,called eta

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #171 on: June 14, 2021, 03:09:37 PM »

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #172 on: June 14, 2021, 03:17:54 PM »
Oh,que surpresa,uma resposta em lingua luso- galaico !Incluindo ac(c)entuagem core(c)ta !
Eu por meu lado nao tenho um problema a ver me no espelho !
Sentimente -as vezes- a pensar : I-A !
sincero
OCWL

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #173 on: June 14, 2021, 03:22:19 PM »
If you move the book at constant speed horizontally,you don't do any work on it, despite the fact that you have to exert an upward force to counter-act gravity.

If i wrote something like this i would never look in the mirror again.


lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #174 on: June 14, 2021, 03:29:15 PM »
Go to your " few formulas"  reply #34 and think and go then to Your next mirror,with/-out specific vegetable

and try to translate Your findings ! You are ever both,You decide !


Point of thinking/point of reality : right and left !

axis-symmetry versus mirror-(observer point,angle)symmetry

Did You never mirror experiments in Your life ? 1 glass mirror ,2 mirror "doors"   ,3x, bath-room inventar  !

Aluminium foil ,copper cable,graphene, ..... de-/reflection


Sincero
OCWL

p.s.: each human his mirrored face halves ,seldom unity symmetrical ( baby face)
         time is a relatively unimportant factor in universal physics,not in terrestrical ,seasonal, bio-sphere economy

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #175 on: June 14, 2021, 03:49:22 PM »
You push the book across the table and then push it back to the starting place.

Indeed, net work on the book is NOT zero.

You done work in form of friction in both directions.

This friction scraped away millions of atoms on the bottom of the book and top of the table during the relative motion.

Even without friction work is done by your muscles to accelerate/decelerate the book 2 times. ATP is broken down into ADP + Pi (adinosine diphosphate + inorganic phosphate) and energy is released.

In any case work is done.

Keep looking in that mirror while chewing on your veggie until you understand work has been done.

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #176 on: June 14, 2021, 03:55:40 PM »
nix85, actio/reactio ( ".... in both directions  ...) and the "Paradoxon"- explication in demonstrative manner !

I fix a magnet to a kitchen fridge door ! When ends the external/internal work process,
by classical physics formulation,by quantum physics formulation ?

Only the magnet/fridge in mind,the surrounding ambient ?

Oh,pardon-me,it is now time for " Essen fassen/almocar" !
Mahlzeit or Bon Appetit or Apgrand

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #177 on: June 14, 2021, 04:00:26 PM »
Don't try to muddy the waters now. Read what you wrote

"If you move the book at constant speed horizontally,you don't do any work on it, despite the fact that you have to exert an upward force to counter-act gravity."

and realize how wrong it is. In your example work is done in many ways, first chemical conversion and contraction of your muscles, acceleration/deceleration of the book, friction against the table, air resistance (small but there).


lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #178 on: June 14, 2021, 04:06:54 PM »
Probably we will also discuss " primary energy work" and " secondary energy work" point of view !? ::) But based by the " Pushing force does the work" quantitative and qualitative example !
Included Paradoxon their contradictions !
Later !

 

nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #179 on: June 14, 2021, 04:12:05 PM »
You will write any kind of nonsense rather that admit you were wrong, why am i not surprized. :)