I don't know if the quote above is due to your complete and total lack of critical thinking skills and total blindness to any kind of context, or, if it is just more completely useless trash talk.

Either way, it is a total fail.

Lol
No fail on my behalf MH.
Do you even read what you post?.

You did not find a link stating that resonance in the combustion chamber was a benefit like you said you would.

And here is what i said--what you quoted me as saying
I will dig up some more info for you ASAP.
Like I said, there is truth in what you say about unwanted resonance. But that truth also dismisses your claim about there being no resonance what so ever within the internals of the ICE ir self.
They use information gathered around these resonant effect to increase the efficiency of the ICE.

Where exactly did i state that resonance in a combustion chamber would be beneficial ?.
That's right--nowhere.
Like i said,you need to read a little better.
Here is what my statement said- there is truth in what you say about unwanted resonance
They use information gathered around these resonant effect to increase the efficiency of the ICE
Is it that hard to understand MH?. If they find an unwanted resonance,they reshape the internal's(in this case ,the piston) to remove that unwanted resonance,and increase the efficiency of the engine.
So,once again you failed to catch me out-as you continually do.
It is clear that i said nothing about this internal resonance increasing the engines efficiency--like you have tried to claim.

So another fail on your behalf MH.
You tried once again to say i said things i did not,and you once again got caught out.
This is becoming a habit with you.

Brad

tinman,
       would you agree with Koala's point about a super-conductor?
                   John.

To which point are you referring to?.


Brad

 author=minnie link=topic=8341.msg479726#msg479726 date=1460027031]

Once the current is flowing at a steady rate, it "costs" nothing more to maintain the magnetic field, and the field itself doesn't dissipate power.

The cost of maintaining the magnetic field,is the flow of current through the coil--no current flow,no magnetic field.
So we have a steady flow of current,and that gives rise to a stable magnetic field--nothing is changing,nor needs to change in order to maintain the magnetic field. But if we have a stable magnetic field around a coil,that dose not create a steady current flow. Current needs no change in time to create the magnetic field,but the magnetic field needs to change in time to create current--or dose it?.
We could also say that the hot air in a balloon creates lift,but lift dose not create hot air

This is how superconducting magnets work.

Superconducting magnets also require outside energy to exist,and this outside energy is in the form of super cooling the conductor. As the conductor draws in energy from the environment(heat),then it slowly looses it's superconductivity.
So energy was needed to create the superconductive state,as energy is needed to create a steady magnetic field around a coil.
No one has been able to prove that the magnetic field takes no energy to maintain,as you cannot have a current flow through a conductor without an associated magnetic field.

The situation is perfectly symmetrical. You get no current produced from a stationary magnet sitting next to a coil, because there is nothing changing.

The same could be said for the current flowing through the coil-as stated above. What is changing in time within that coil that gives rise to a stable magnetic field?.

A magnetic field changing in time is not what creates current flow. Current flow is created by the motion of the Electrons, Ions,or photons. We can prove this by looking at the simple homopolar generator,where current flows due to motion of the electrons in the conductor,as the magnetic field dose not change in time in regards to the conductor. If the conductor has no motion,then there is no current flow. We also know that reversing the direction of motion,also reverses the direction of current flow. We can have the magnets fixed to the conductor,so as they rotate with the conductor,or have them fixed to the carrier(frame),so as they do not move with the conductor,and nothing changes.

If the flow of current is needed to create a magnetic field around a coil,then current must be flowing within a permanent magnet. Energy is dissipated by the electromagnet's coil due to this current flow,and so energy must be dissipated by the permanent magnet.

Most just say--well the magnetic domains are now aligned,and so we have a PM. But hardly no one ask's- what is the energy that is maintaining that alignment-what is actually going on with each electron within the atoms of that magnetic material ?.

The biggest problem here ,is that most have just settled for the good old !Faradays law of induction-a theory pieced together as the result of confusion--why one,and not the other?
Well,as they dont yet know what the magnetic force is,then Faraday's law of induction will do for the time being--as we have no other answer.
This is what people have settled on. We now know how to create and use the magnetic field,so why bother finding out what it actually is?

Move the magnet (or the coil), so that the coil experiences a changing magnetic field, and you get current.  Remember Faraday's Law of Induction (and pay no attention to the confused ravings of EMJunkie):

Like i stated above-neither the magnetic field or the conductor have to move in relation to each other for there to be current flow-there only has to be motion and a fixed reference point,but the magnetic field and the conductor may travel together where there is no change in time between the two-the homopolar generator

The holy grail is finding out what the magnetic force is--what is that magnetic field?.

The very same happened when we figured out what light was-like sun light. We then learned how to use these photons to knock electrons out of the park,and create a current flow-the solar panel.
Now,can you imagine what will happen when we find out what is flowing in this field that surrounds a permanent magnet,and then we find our magnetic field !solar panel!.

We know there is a magnetic force-we use it all the time.
We also know that force is -Quote: strength or energy as an attribute of physical action or movement.

So something is in motion in the magnetic field of the permanent magnet--we just have to work out what it is.


Brad

Chet:

Miles when it comes to "all things resonant"
never assume you know it all....

Don't put words in my mouth that I never said.

Put up a mechanical schematic and timing diagram and explain the "huge standing wave" because without it it appears to just be talk.  I am willing to learn but with just talk it could just be your resonance fetish bias rendering you all dreamy eyed.

MileHigh

Brad:

If the flow of current is needed to create a magnetic field around a coil,then current must be flowing within a permanent magnet. Energy is dissipated by the electromagnet's coil due to this current flow,and so energy must be dissipated by the permanent magnet.

You are just proudly demonstrating your ignorance and willingness to invent your own Bizarro logic.  Energy is not being dissipated by a permanent magnet.  But don't let that fact stop you.  You are the infallible Dr. Brainfry and what Brainfry says goes.

MileHigh

@ MH

As requested.

The invention relates to a piston for a cylinder of a two-stroke internal combustion engine.The air within the cavity is caused to resonate at high frequency, thereby enhancing the combustion process

https://www.google.ch/patents/US4969425

Chet:

Don't put words in my mouth that I never said.

Put up a mechanical schematic and timing diagram and explain the "huge standing wave" because without it it appears to just be talk.  I am willing to learn but with just talk it could just be your resonance fetish bias rendering you all dreamy eyed.

MileHigh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volumetric_efficiency

http://www.amrca.com/tech/tuners.pdf

http://3cyl.com/mraxl/manuals/chamberdesign/2003exhaust.pdf

http://www.xplorer.co.za/articles/exhaust.htm

http://people.eng.unimelb.edu.au/imarusic/proceedings/6/JonesBrown.pdf

http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/engine/Intake_exhaust.html

And the list go's on and on and on.
If you cant learn from this MH,then there is no hope for you.


Brad