Arindam:

Permanet magnet motors have been around for decades now. The Chinese use permanent magnets to make perpetual motion machines. Yes, these machines are awesome beyond belief for those nurtured by old and wrong physics notions.

I see in my neighborhood so called "scooters". A rider stands while operating it. Is the scooter using a PM? Guess not, as they "die" when, I suspect, they run out of charge. The guys owning the scooters pick up the dead ones presumably

located with GPS. Can you please explain how the scooter works?

I suppose it is a battery running a electric motor. When the battery dies, the scooter does not work. If instead of a battery they had a perpetual motion motor using permanent magnets, then it would never die. The motor would produce a torque,

give that to a generator, which would produce electricity.

The Pakistanis made one such, put it on youtube. Look up the Perendev simulation, Bhaskaracharya's wheel, alibaba for the pmm, etc. Read some papers on permanent magnets, see how they are getting used even in large ship motors.
As I wrote before, making a fuel-less generator is expensive, and not efficient cost-wise. PMs use rare earths that are expensive. But PMs are replacing the stators, made of steel and copper. They are smaller, lighter and more expensive.

Thanks

By the way, when permanent magnets are made in labs, there is a net energy consumption that goes into making them. So where is the PMM?

The PM will generate force always until physically damaged. So, it will create more energy than went into its making, but this point is basically invalid. The Sun always generates energy, violating the law of conservation of energy. Which

get destroyed in the infinite universe, to manifest as background noise.

Thanks

This news was indeed useful to me, for it showed how the perpetual motion machine had to work, and indeed alibaba sells the pmm but as the cost of permanent magnets is high as compared to the usual steel and copper, it is not cost

effective save for certain situations.

They do however prove my theory that the law of conservation of energy is at best a special case - usually energy is always getting created and destroyed in our infinite universe.

Where does the magnetism go?

Magnetism is caused by the current loops in the magnetic material. With heat the material loses its magnetism, for then the heat destroys the patterns causing the current loops. Within a given temperature range the magnetism does not

disappear. This is a great new finding which is at the heart of the new electric motor industry.

I think the charge which is responsible for its magnetism has been dissipated somehow. ????

No, the charge never disappears. The law of conservation of charge, is valid. To the extent that the charge amounts to mass, the law of conservation of mass is valid.

Regards

Energy is a economic concept, favoured by the bunny-ahs, for storing and selling by restriction.
It is essentially forces we should be cocerned about, in physics.

Primarily, the law of conservation of charge. Charge never gets destroyed. This is the ultimate foundation of my new physics.

Arindam:

Please understand, the law of conservation of energy is a canard by bunny-ah types.

I think in a closed system, such as in a lab, law of conservation of energy holds true. In a ginormous system it fails because of our limitation in understanding large numbers. If we have a good way to measure energy, such as your equations,

that can be applied to stars and galaxies then we can be sure that law of conservation of energy isn't true. On the other hand, hindus believe that from poornam if you remove poornam what remains is poornam. Physicists, conventional ones that is, are
more used to applying e=mcc for anything and everything of the cosmic scale assuming light of speed is a constant. Do you agree?

No.

Arindam:

The speed of light varies with the speed of emission, so the physicists are all liars or fools. As they are clever enough, to get PhDs, they cannot be called fools, but unscupulous careerist scoundrels thriving on lies.

Thank you for sharing your insight. I think the variance in the speed of light is taken into account in the case of black holes. Is there any "object" with mass that is moving at the speed of light except near a BH? To answer myself, perhaps the

galaxies that have already receded from our telescopes. Hence the research into "expanding universe" by the Nobel laureate Schmidt et al. is significant. Sorry for my astute observation that you and the rest of the physicists, on a macro scale, are
twisting physics so as to satisfy your individual tastes. From a layman's perspective both of you are telling the same thing without doing experiments such as Newton and Copernicus, to mention a few.

Stars continually emit radiation, which at any point in the universe is noise containing all frequencies. Energy is simply a way to use force to do work.

Force is the word. For real physicists, not bunny-ahs.

The universe is so designed that the interstellar distances are so very large that at any point the radiant electromagnetic forces at all frequencies from all stars add up to a force vector which when squared gives an energy value, which is

reasonably constant.

If force is amenable to arithmetic, and can be a zero sum,

It is not a zero sum for background noise, which is what I said.

My comment was about the commonly observed forces that can be zero sum. I remember you mentioning an experiment where a submerged object, at a great depth of an ocean, would not break up if the forces from all sides are balanced with the forces from

within.

Yes, at the centre of the Earth there is no net force, as matter pulls symmetrically from all sides. so no pressure, so no temperature, so superconducting currents are possible leading to the magentic field we know. Not just for Earth, but the sun and
dark stars.

Yes, we are not crushed by air pressure as it acts equally on all sides.
But at any given point is space the electric fields evidently do not add up to zero for there is noise as its square, and that shows it has to be nonzero. In my electronics lab I asked why the oscillator oscillates with positive feedback. The answer is
cosmic radiation. The little energy from the flat spectrum will multiply to give us oscillation.

Now the universe is moving, so its symmetry is always changing. So the net field from all the stars will not be zero, the fields cannot add up to zero, but a small finite.

I interpreted it as zero sum (may be the misunderstanding is mine). As per your statements, energy is proportional to the square of force. I can't derive by myself because you are talking about radiation. A long time ago in college physics I read about

radiation pressure. I believe Einstein is the one who studied it and had written papers on it. Are you accepting his theory on radiation pressure?

Einstein bungled as usual.

Radiation which is a wave and not momentum of any kind creates current on one side, the sun facing side,of a space sail, heating one side and thus causing a heat flow within the sail which transforms to motion. Meaning acceleration, force, pressure is
created. Nothing to do with quantum mechanics, just internal motion from conducting heat, pushing against the far side.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)