No. I didn't get my electronics knowledge from tv...I got it with my EET degree.
At least I didn't get it from the back of Cheerios box, like yourself.
Wow..your posts are all over the place..do you have a mental disorder of some type?
Can Sound Waves Boil water at overunity efficiency with specific frequency of sound?
- Thread starter Sci-guy
- Start date
No. I didn't get my electronics knowledge from tv...I got it with my EET degree.
At least I didn't get it from the back of Cheerios box, like yourself.
Wow..your posts are all over the place..do you have a mental disorder of some type?
maybe that is why you spend so much much on forums......... still unemployed; still cannot use your knowledge for anything that develops
cracker-jacks
the degree is better than yours as we get water tatoos also
absolutely.
the thread is how 'sound waves boil water', but between the non-reading magyvers, barking about what is wrong with everyone....
the subject is all over the place....
no JOKE, you 2 goofs are like religious people; will follow the complacent right off the ledge.
neither of you use any integrity before tapping keys
yes.......... resonance can combine with its environment and increase the total potential.
i.e.... have you ever wondered what a rogue wave is? Like how could energy align and share a greater potential than its surrounding environment?
or let me guess.... they don't exist either because if goes against the laws of thermodynamics?
you boys are not even in the same decade as far as knowledge.
maybe in 20 years you could hold a topic and drill it down;
better still
go lay by your dish
I got a job, I'm the head of a technical support department. I use my knowledge every day.
Time for this thread to die.
and we can all see where you spend it
now in light of this thread; seems you and 'technical support' is an oxy-moron
knowledge of what?
you can't figure out how to transmit from a radio? even with $9.00 kits for middle school kids.
as well, you have no comprehension of how Davey's heats his cup of coffee (what the thread is about)
technical support? for what a commador 64 or are you still a TI guy?
you can program a random process, in which a ball appears to bounce and change colors............ 'randomly' ..... isn't that exciting?
or anything else you put your hands into
mayb if you purchase a Tesla album at least you can say something when the word comes up next time.
LOL!! Actually, your pretty close. I work for a company that recycles and refurbishes IT assets. I actually saw a "trash-80" in tear down the other day...boy that brought back some memories. I thought about pulling it, and giving to to the Ebay guys to sell...it might get some nostalgia money.
Although most are machines are around 2-5 years old.
I'm the type who doesn't perform well on demand, unless it's not too boring. If a boss or a company is a loser I don't work for it - I just wait and usually someone wants me to do something. As long as they understand I'm not there to be told anything about how to do the task, or follow orders, except what they want done with their stupid computer thingamy.
Taking PCs apart or putting them together can be ok dosh, but it's like fixing lawnmowers after a while (not too long a while in my case).
I like taking stuff apart and putting it back together another way, more betterer.
It's more fun when you're an open systems dude, but bosses prefer them closed again.
Taking PCs apart or putting them together can be ok dosh, but it's like fixing lawnmowers after a while (not too long a while in my case).
I like taking stuff apart and putting it back together another way, more betterer.
It's more fun when you're an open systems dude, but bosses prefer them closed again.
i guess its not Insight.
maybe i was off, bet you see lots of IBM sys36 and AS400's.
point being you not on the cutting edge (look up polaritonics, that IS the new cutting edge to memory)
meaning open a thread and i will share how polaritonics is almost 'exactly' how living forms maintain 'memory'
i.e... not a binary system, in which the crystal structure maintains the properties of the 'f' within a structural constraint, rather than gates (on/off)
where i am going is if you want material to grow, i'm your hucklberry
if you want to duel; 'say when'
as this kid is not foolin around...... this is all I do.......study, learn and rattle cages.........
it's time for a paradigm shift and either you on board for the good of our future, the children, or you are not!
as long as that is the premise in all pursuits or we are not friends
this 'i' will never give in to the so called community; most are morons of complacency and that does nothing for tomorrow
all banches of the sciences are in for a roll over; right now the climb is slow moving as the beginning is at the terminal (get the hint) but once the momentum starts grab the rail and hang on as every single field of science is to be affected
and that is not even the important stuff; imagine being able to teach your kids what life is, perfectly true to existence!
a born rebel?
so is the system of choice closed (entropic) or open for progress (capable of increasing its (your) potential from the environment)?
Can Sound Waves Boil water?
let's hear a resonating............ "yyyeeesss"
Please do! I'd love to hear about it. I've always wondered if we were ever going to get a non-binary system computer.
have you looked into the new thread opened?
just think if a human being was run on a binary system as suggested in todays physiology material? Then a magnet would be like cryptonite to a living form. Or to bring a simple electronic divice into or even in the proximity of an MRI magnet, it is ruined. Now if your brain was based on binary connections; an MRI would tear memories apart.
welcome to reality 101
and
Yes~
resonant energy can shatter glass, and boil water, etc.....
the same principle that rogue waves are born of.
And what about your claims? You have no evidence, you cannot provide a working description and you demonstrate a lack of understanding for mainstream concepts. All in all, that sounds very much like a religous person's behaviour when they try to discuss physics like cosmology with scientists.
There's nothing to do with 'over unity' processes though. Ocean dynamics are highly non-linear systems which can often exhibit chaos (the technical term, not the 'It's all random!' layman use of the word). Even within a chaotic non-linear system you can see find areas which will, for short periods of time, form highly coherent systems. Rough waves are the result of positive feedback within the system which causes the wave energy not to disipate quickly enough and the energy of the wave keeps climbing as more and more waves combine to form it.
Nothing 'over unity' about it, the energy and momentum for a rogue wave comes from all the smaller waves it's absorbed. Long lasting non-linear waves can be, and are, modelled via solitons. Infact, it was physically observed decades before they were observed.
Then you guess wrong.
If you want to go toe to toe with someone who knows a **** ton about solitons I'm sure I could ask a friend who researches such things at Cambridge.
Firstly, do you know how to show the KdV equation has solitonic solutions?
Nothing you did was new or impressive. Like I said, my mum used to screw up our TV doing the vacuuming. When I am using my wireless headphones to listen to music and I walk through the alarm system in shops I get a loud buzzing sound. Strong magnetic fields or random noise are easy to generate.
He doesn't even provide evidence he does do what he claims. There's no temperature data, no measurements of current and voltage for the device and no model which describes it. As I said in a previous post, it looks like he's just boiled the water in the kettle you can see in the video and then if he put in a blob of copper headed to 300C it would boil. Or if the glob of copper has a heating element in it which makes it scalding hot then he's just conning people.
Without proper investigation, there's nothing to back up his claims.
How many cranks have been saying that, for decades (if not centuries)? We had cold fusion hoaxes 20 years ago. No revolution. We've had loads of 'theories of everything' put online by cranks. No revolution.
Your 'polaritonics' is incoherent, unscientific nonsense because it isn't able to actually predict or accurately model anything.
Try teaching yourself physics first. I bet you cannot answer a few questions expected of school children. You'll avoid answering them with a "I don't do maths, I do concepts" or something like that. Thus proving you don't know what physics is.
Yes, it can but not like that guy has done.
Show me an indepth, scientific, investigation of his device and I'll retract my comment about him being a liar and a fraud (he's looking for investors!). Until then he hasn't shown he has any result.
If you think you understand physics, care to answer a few homework questions I give students in their 1st years? Also, if you think you've got a working model, show, using indepth quantitative methods, that the oscillations of molecules in water, held together by hydrogen bonding and Van der Waal's forces, leads to a lowering in the strength of the covalent bonds within the molecules themselves. You're saying inter-molecular motion alters inter-atomic bonds.
Prove it. I bet you cannot.
That was sweetness, A.N. 
as the kids say..."Pwned!"
as the kids say..."Pwned!"
then why not release the foolishness of your education and look up 'polaritonics' or 'neural interaction by light' or how phospholipid bilayers assemble..... or or or or or....
this list of what is being described changing everything all the way to defining what 'heat' is.
you can't talk that way, it's against the 2nd law of thermodynamics...
or simply to a standard model goof, that system is impossible
sounds like life in a nutshell.
Polaritonics is existing scientific research; it t'ain't my idea.
not my fault you can't read
then share with us oh, mighty fool, what is the cause of Mercury's orbit? Let's guess your answer is............dahhhhhhh... dark matter dude
polaritonics was to share that in the sciences (current and why it is out of your comprehension) that a structure can retain a set of properties and when a signal is conveyed upon that structure, them properties are returned.....
i shared how it is the same form as to how memories of the brain are held upon structures verus the moronic idea that memories are held as binary systems......
again a little beyond your comprehension...
just as to open up a can of worms on solitons.... shares how Davey's system of heating water with a resonant wave can work......
this is what makes me tired of dealing with fools, they really do not comprehend what they are saying
I didn't say such things are unknown to science or don't exist. I called into question your grasp of them and your claims about your work.
No, it isn't. For instance, a well known demonstration of chaotic systems involves bifrucation, where the splitting of paths is found to be chaotic (as per a specific mathematical definition, not just 'it's complicated'). And yet such a system of bifrucations looks like this. Notice the sudden and a repeated patches of simplicity within an otherwise increasingly complicated system? Another chaotic system would be the solar system. The motion of more than 2 gravitationally interacting objects was proven 'chaotic' by Poincare. Indeed, it was the problem of describing the solar system over very long lengths of time which prompted Poincare to practically invent the entire area of chaotic systems. And yet, every now and again planets line up. We get eclipses with the Moon lines up with the Sun and Earth. We even get it with 4 or 5 planets every few centuries or millenia (or more!). Every now and again the system passes through a very nice and symmetric layout.
So I can talk that way, given I've got evidence to back up my claims.
I didn't claim it was your idea, I said the concepts you put your own 2 cents on turn out to be nonsense. Like how you won't publish a particular result of yours because the military will use it to kill people in some way you claim your work will allow them to do. It's not my fault you never bothered to learn any physics and now you don't understand it.
No, dark matter has nothing to do with the orbit of Mercury. Dark matter works on galactic scales, not the solar system scales. Explaining why the orbit of Mercury is not what Newtonian theory predicts but actually what relativity predicts is a homework question for GR students. I had to do a short computing project on it in my 3rd year. I learnt and understood the equations and then write a computer program in C which works out the relativity based orbit of Mercury around a star and compared it to what Newtonian theory said. I even got it to plot orbits. Then I went on to model comet trajectories and finally onto using that work to compute the absorption cross section for black holes. And that was just one project out of 4 I did that year. Never mind all the courses in Newtonian and relativistic mechanics, which I then sat and passed during my exams.
So it's not my fault you don't read and so don't know dark matter isn't a factor in the motion of Mercury. And you couldn't even address my challenge of answering a few questions to prove you aren't a liar.
This the essay you wrote when you were 16?
Just like quantum mechanics and cosmology is beyond yours it seems.
Do you even know what a soliton is? Solitons in water still wouldn't magically make over unity energy.
If you claim otherwise, show it with indepth quantitative derivations from a solitonic concept and the physical properties of water. If you want a few pointers on solitons in quantum field theory, read this.
with a post like this i can see you just will not learn
a mathematical theorem to patch observation, has nothing to do with Davey's or anything of increasing potential
and if the math is wrong might as well create some more dark junk
why not say your head is a little chaotic as you just cannot stay focused
that resonant energy can heat water, as well polaritonics share how mass can retain a property to mass?
please step aside, you all over the board
over 75% of the universe is supposed to be dark crap and now it don't apply with what we can experience, nor the rotation of mercury?
thread not about dark matter
i was making fun of you because you jump up and down about what you know and still cannot admit the very model you maintain cannot answer the very question you impose.....
this thread is about heat water with resonance and how the very properties of energy that enable this ruin the standard model of thinking
and you too foolish to just do a little homework.....
and now i know why
because you will probably say........... 'now, why didn't i think of that'
its time for a little evolution
and you getting it free, just shut up and stay focused and you might learn something
So tell me, what have you learnt about general relativity and cosmology? By the looks of it, nothing.
That has nothing to do with dark energy or dark matter. It was giving an example of how a chaotic system, which is pretty much the definition of 'chaotic' (as physicists and mathematicians define the word), can develop spontaneous simplistic structures. Which proved your claim, that such a thing is impossible, wrong.
I am staying focues. You made a claim about chaotic systems, I gave examples of how chaotic systems demonstrated your claims are wrong.
When you make a claim about physics I can demonstrate is false, I'll point it out. If you stop being wrong, I'll stop having anything to correct you on.
Thus showing you don't know anything about general relativity and dark matter and energy.
The universe is 70% dark energy. This only has an effect over distances larger than 100 million light years. A lot smaller than Mercury's orbital radius. Another 26% of the universe is dark matter, which makes up the majority of galactic material but only has an effect over the distances of order the galactic radius, which is about 100,000 light years. And for reference, the orbital radius of Mercury is less than one light minute.
So dark matter and dark energy do not have enough effect within the very very small region between the Sun and Mercury to alter it's orbit very much.
No, I actually specifically stated that general relativity can explain the motion of Mercury. Newton couldn't, there was a slight difference between his calculations and the actual motion of the planet. Einstein got a better model, which explained the motion perfectly.
So 'the very model maintain [can] answer the very question impose'! Like I said, this is a homework question to students!
And you're too foolish to even learn what 'dark energy' and 'dark matter' are and do. Yet you whine about it.
and you getting it free, just shut up and stay focused and you might learn something [/QUOTE]Too scared to learn what physics actually means by terminology like 'chaotic', 'dark energy' and 'dark matter' then?
Tell me, what does 'chaotic' mean then?