Tired of Jim_Mich ??

[preoccupied]

Cloud camper, why don't you challenge my physics arguments? I mean I have got to be worse. I just posted some BS about peacocks tail (well I don't think it's BS) on Jim_Mich other topic. And that has to be some new unusual creative physics BS that you should hate. Go bother me. I might enjoy it. I'm not joking. I'm waiting for someone to at least acknowledge my idea.

[cloud camper]

Hi Preocc - I know you're trying hard to come up with new ideas and that is very commendable.

But I don't understand your ideas from any normal physics perspective.
I would have to spend much time trying to clarify your ideas and terminology to even begin to evaluate it.

Also, you have not claimed "runners" going back years based on the same known false premise as Jim has.

With Jim's ideas, I do understand what he is presenting and all the physics behind it. Unfortunately this same idea has been tried by many others and has always had negative results.

And now with Jim's failed wheel based on Jim's failed ideas, he continues to promote this as a "solution" to the wheel. This is sheer insanity!

I have provided demos and simulations that anyone interested can do that will prove Jim's "motion" theories are crap physics.

And anytime Jim promotes this nonsense, I will continue to call him on it and show exactly why his ideas are unworkable from a physics standpoint.

As far as your ideas go, I believe that since neither you or Jim understand physics, the two of you would be the best team to discuss your ideas.

Good luck!

[triplock]

''As far as your ideas go, I believe that since neither you or Jim understand
physics, the two of you would be the best team to discuss your ideas''.


Now that is funny :-D

[jim_mich]

Cloud camper attacks me again. So who is the bully?
Let it go.

Cloud camper, you don't know all the details of my idea, thus your statement, "this same idea has been tried by many others and has always had negative results." is a false statement.
Let it go.

[preoccupied]

As far as your ideas go, I believe that since neither you or Jim understand physics, the two of you would be the best team to discuss your ideas.

Jim refuses to see my ideas because he feels that it will entangle legally with his already completed design in the patent process. That makes me feel like my ideas have credibility since they are close to what Jim_Mich has... I am almost certain Jim_Mich ignores most of my posts on Bessler wheel and I think I was unfriended on facebook. This makes me believe Jim_Mich is annoyed with me a little. I don't blame him any, I am probably a little bit annoying: no offense preoccupied - none taken.

cloud camper, Maybe you should think about how much I understand physics? I don't know how to calculate much because of being mathematically challenged right now but I visualize mechanical things and try to understand them independent from algorithms that have already been developed. If I were learning math or anything else in the common core schooling system I would be required to think of my own methods to find solutions to problems instead of just memorizing existing algorithms. This is a thinking skill that might never develop in a person who doesn't learn this way and I might have an advantage over you because of it if I ever catch up in education in the mechanical engineering topic. So there. Take that. You long eared galoot. =-D =-D =-D Though that is a funny statement "since neither you or Jim understand physics, the two of you would be the best team to discuss your ideas", I have to admit. You fight well, you ride well, and you make witty repartee.

[FunWithGravity2]

Hey Jim, voted don't care. Why bother asking?

How many people get the irony here that everyone thinks everyone else is crazy and delusional. Definately a "One Flew over the cokoos nest" enviroment, don't forget what happened in the end. Seems to happen here all to often.


And around we go.........



Crazy Dave

[Jon J Hutton]

Jim,

I have always enjoyed your posts. Whenever I have had a question about the exact weight of water or how to calculate almost any type of design to see if it is OU. You have always come through.

Honestly this thread needs to be buried! Let's get on with solving this problem. We are getting very close........grin!

Jon H.

[Grimer]

Hey Jim, voted don't care. Why bother asking?

How many people get the irony here that everyone thinks everyone else is crazy and delusional. Definately a "One Flew over the cokoos nest" enviroment, don't forget what happened in the end. Seems to happen here all to often.


And around we go.........



Crazy Dave

“All the world's queer save thee and me, dear, and even thou art a little queer.� :-)

[preoccupied]

Jim,

I just want to say that you are some kind of awesome. If an idiot like me is allowed to be on Besslerwheel.com there is no reason that someone of value who is a helpful contributor with cool ideas should leave. I mean you. Nobody on the forum should be able to decide who can leave except Scott. Expletive, I'm surprised I'm still here. Thank you Scott. Cloud Camper can stick it where the sun doesn't shine. You know, his Angle Side Side. If he can find it.

preoccupied

I voted Jim should not leave and I meant to.

[ovyyus]

And around we go...

[primemignonite]

Although Jim_Mich and I were never able to hit-it-off in a friendly way (which very much I would have liked to have been the resulting case) he certainly has most carefully and extensively laid-out and defended his beliefs / knowledge and ideas.

In-and-of-itself, such an effort I find admirable: A veritable INDUSTRY of it, he has created and been.

In the Final Equation right or wrong, he heads inexorably toward something seeming tangible. For one I could not know what it might be but truly, he does!

I vote that the hearty chap should STAY.

And in stating the above, I intend no offense toward his various of well-spoken rational detractors; those having obviously their good, defensible points to assert and argue too but, all that would be an other matter for another place of discussion, I do believe?

(The Irratonalites of them, however, being postjudicially excluded absolutely! Many know that I am not a ready friend to they that attack to injure; to draw-forth blood as their sport. For these loathsome types, in the width of a heartbeat, I would vote to excommunicate. They know well which they are. Upon them and their like, Providence will likely not smile.)

James ( !! )

[jim_mich]

Hey James, Cynic-In-Chief, BesslerWheel (Ret.)

You are totally OK in my book. My only quarrel with you, which was only a very tiny one, was that I had much trouble understanding your Edwardian type of writing.

[cloud camper]

As far as your ideas go, I believe that since neither you or Jim understand physics, the two of you would be the best team to discuss your ideas.

Jim refuses to see my ideas because he feels that it will entangle legally with his already completed design in the patent process. That makes me feel like my ideas have credibility since they are close to what Jim_Mich has... I am almost certain Jim_Mich ignores most of my posts on Bessler wheel and I think I was unfriended on facebook. This makes me believe Jim_Mich is annoyed with me a little. I don't blame him any, I am probably a little bit annoying: no offense preoccupied - none taken.

cloud camper, Maybe you should think about how much I understand physics? I don't know how to calculate much because of being mathematically challenged right now but I visualize mechanical things and try to understand them independent from algorithms that have already been developed. If I were learning math or anything else in the common core schooling system I would be required to think of my own methods to find solutions to problems instead of just memorizing existing algorithms. This is a thinking skill that might never develop in a person who doesn't learn this way and I might have an advantage over you because of it if I ever catch up in education in the mechanical engineering topic. So there. Take that. You long eared galoot. =-D =-D =-D Though that is a funny statement "since neither you or Jim understand physics, the two of you would be the best team to discuss your ideas", I have to admit. You fight well, you ride well, and you make witty repartee.

That's great Preocc - I believe one thing that could help you would be to get up to speed on WM2D.

Then even with a physics limited education, the program will apply all
relevant physics laws to your ideas.

You can simulate the stork's bill and see if it will power your wheel.

Good luck!

[preoccupied]

cloud camper,
I can't use WM2D because I can't buy it right now. My brain says, {Error}, !insufficient funds, *try again later*. I am not willing to pirate the product. All you guys who pirated it are expletives, expletive and another expletive.

If I were to use WM2D, it would have the same limitations as analyzing Jim_Mich's design, which is secret and that I don't know and will never know because he will take it to his grave like Bessler (just kidding). Because it would be bound by existing physics laws that were built on OTHER observations and obviously my design and hypothesis needs a working model to look at these new observations because simulations don't know everything.

[jim_mich]

The question (which has been discussed before) is whether or not WM2D would show Bessler's wheel as working, assuming we knew Bessler's secret.

In my opinion, the answer is no. The reason is in the method that programs such as WM2D use to solve for motion. There is no way whereby such programs can figure out complex assemblies so as to calculate everything in a conventional manner where they follow force 'A' as it pushes part 'B' which is linked to parts 'C', 'D', and 'D', etc, Then it must take into account all inertia and momentum, and gravity acting on each object, and any springs, etc. It just cannot be done, except someone writes unique computer code for a specific mechanical assembly.

But the program does know the relationships of all objects and all motions and all the kinetic energy within all the objects, and it knows all forces including gravity that enter the system. The program makes a guess as to how far objects have moved from one step to the next based on their previous motions. It then calculates the new KE in everything. If the change of KE is not zero, then the program assumes it moved things too fast or too slow. So it makes another guess. If that guess does not equal out to zero change of KE, then it calculates its next guess based on the last two guesses. This third guess it usually very close. The forth guess usually hits zero change of KE.

Even if Bessler's wheel were modeled in WM2D, the program would assume conservation of energy, and force the model to not gain any energy. This is the nature of computer modeling.

WM2D is great for figuring out how things might act. But it will never show over-unity. If you discover a real working wheel, WM2D will never show it as working, because that would go against how WM2D is programed.

This is just my opinion.
I've had this same opinion of WM2D for many years.

PS.
My old HP48sx programmable calculator from 1989 has a 'solver' program. Give it a formula to solve, and it will solve most any formula. A long time ago, I extracted the 'solver' program from that calculator and analyzed how it solved formulas. And it was as I described above.