From: user2039@newsgrouper.org.invalid
Vincent Maycock posted:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 14:41:27 GMT, E.Laureti
> wrote:
>
> >
> >jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) posted:
> >
> >> ERROR "unexpected byte sequence starting at index 287: '\xE2'" while
decoding:
> >>
> >> In article <0001HW.2E54AA9A0031F5CB70000253B38F@news.supernews.com>,
> >> WolfFan wrote:
> >> >On Aug 19, 2025, Von Ottone wrote
> >> >(in article<54n8ak9iq1pa8cnl33lngo12c2qegdaci8@4ax.com>):
> >> >
> >> >> Envy is a nasty beast; it makes you jealous and clouds your mind.
> >> >
> >> >You still canâ??t lift one kilo one meter for one minute.
> >> >
> >> >Note that, according to your own â??figuresâ??, if you lifted a
working fluid
> >> >(water, for instance) and then let it fall past a turbine, the power.
> >> >generated would exceed the power required to lift the working fluid.
Thatâ??s
> >> >a perpetual motion machine of the second type. Which is impossible. Your
> >> >machine simply cannot work, and never will. Youâ??re simply a bunch of
con
> >> >artists trying on a scam.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Disclaimer: I don't think this device works at all but if it did. I am
> >> sufficiently confident in the conservation laws
> >
> >usi il traduttore .
> >Il dettaglio essenziale che non nota è che le leggi di conservazione
newoniane
> >sono state elaborate senza conoscere la forza di Lorentz su cui si basa la
PNN.
> >E poi dimentica che la fisica ha origini sperimentali
> >e tutto si deve piegare SEMPRE all'esperimento.
> >Ho sempre detto che le leggi di conservazione di Newton vanno poi
> >interpretate con l'inserimento dell'elettrodinamica che Newton neppure
conosceva.
> >E' un compito che lascio ad altri
> >Mi occupo di fare BENE solo gli esperimenti e di mostrarli agli increduli.
> >L'uso ossessivo della meccanica newtoniana per la propulsione in
astronautica
> >ci preclude ogni colonizzazione dello spazio come la reatà finora dimostra
brutalmente.
>
> That is,
>
> >"use the translator. The essential detail that you do not notice is that
Newtonian conservation
> >laws were developed without knowing the Lorentz force on which PNN is based.
>
> No, the Lorentz force is quite consistent with Newtonian dynamics. And
> Newtonian conservation laws were derived from first principles by Emmy
> Noether some time after special relativity was developed.
>
> >And then you forget that physics has experimental origins and that
> >everything must always bend to the experiment.
>
> But experiment must be consistent with previously verified theory.
>
> > I have always said that Newton's conservation laws must then be interpreted
> >with the inclusion of electrodynamics, which Newton did not even know.
>
> Which led to relativity, not perpetual motion machines or whatever
> you're trying to do.
>
> > It is a task
> >that I leave to others. I focus on doing experiments WELL and showing them
to the skeptics.
> >The obsessive use of Newtonian mechanics for propulsion in astronautics
precludes
> >any colonization of space, as reality has so far brutally demonstrated.
>
> So because you want to travel through space, Newtonian mechanics
> *must* be wrong?
>
> >>that my first question
> >> on seeing it work (after checking for invisible fishing line or cgi)
> >> would be to wonder from what source the motive energy is being drawn.
> >>
> >> (It's never tachyons. It would be cool if it was tachyons, except
> >> for the whole "universes with tachyons may not be stable" deal)
> >>
> >>
>
too much alone words against PNN !
repeat experimentally this
http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png
https://neolegesmotus.com/2020/11/02/field-self-interaction-elec
romagnetic-thruster/
you are only unable to do any elementary experiment
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
