[Archive!] Pure mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.: brain-training problems not related to trade in any way - page 486

New comment
 
Richie:

Kapanadze said on Skype that no ferrite is there, there is no core. Regarding the cross-section, look at the picture on the previous page, all three windings are connected in series. Therefore the current in them is the same. Then why they should have different cross sections is not clear.

The inductance is different.

Scheme. For unambiguous repetition.

Otherwise it's chatter. None of us can convince each other.

And there's no point.

The experiment is either repeatable or it's bullshit.

 
Abzasc:
If there was a diagram or principle, I would have done it myself.
 
Richie:

The conversation with Kapanadze.

Which one of them is less sane?

Richie:
There would have been a scheme or principle - I would have done it myself.

How many years ago did this Kapanadze come along?

Just out of curiosity.

I have a comrade. Occasionally covered in similar ideas... Not that I'm burning with the desire to teach/convince anyone, but a friend is a friend, I had to get into it sometimes, to formulate the wording, yeah. So. I don't remember him for about five and a half years.

By and large I don't remember the others either, but there were no Georgian names there (back then), that's for sure.

***

You have a university degree, if I am not mistaken?

Put yourself in the shoes of a music video operator... or an interviewer... all mercantile interests aside...

Not even that. Imagine interviewing Ivan the Terrible.

Which bloopers would you try to eliminate first?

 
Richie:
If there was a diagram or principle, I would have done it myself.
The principle, by the way, is voiced.
 
Richie:
If I had a scheme or a principle, I would have made it myself.

Richie, are you serious?

No, I understand doing maths, physics, but building a perpetual motion machine... you've got to be out of your mind. And you're taking the piss out of Lurk, too.)

No one will give you any schemes and principles for one simple reason - there are none. Just no, and that's it, even if you tear it down. It's all rubbish. It's bullshit. It's a sucker's trick. Get it into your head and remember it every time along with the law of conservation of energy and the like.

 
alsu: ... It's all bullshit. Bullshit. It's a sucker's trick. Get it into your head and remember it every time, along with the law of conservation of energy and the like.

I'll believe it's bullshit and a scam if I get proof of it. So far I have no such proof. Are you ready to prove it? The answer is no. Regarding the law of conservation of energy: I honour it myself, but we are not talking about violating it.

Abzasc, I have two degrees, I have a PhD and I have no desire to interview Vanya Grozny :)

Alsu, now a question for you personally.

You know Paschen's law, of course. Let's forget about pressure. Explain, why the dependence of arc ignition voltage on the distance between electrodes is non-linear? I'll tell you right away - you won't be able to do it. And where there's non-linearity, there's "money"...

OK, the topic is closed, I'm tired of arguing with you.

 
Richie:

I have no desire to be interviewed by Vanya Grozny either :) \

1 the first, the main, the main... that's the mistake that puts an end to any tester.

I'll continue, later.

 
Richie:
topic closed


Categorically against

 
Abzasc:


Categorically against

It does not depend, unfortunately, on our will. Thanks to a certain category of individuals who think they are the chosen ones, the topic has not been closed for five hundred years.
 
Richie:

I'll believe it's a scam and a scam if I get proof of it.

This is the only argument from the authors of these "theories". I haven't heard any others, believe me, EVER. That is why I call the whole thing a fake.
1...479480481482483484485486487488489490491492493...628
New comment