Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    There is no monk, and he runs down the mountain just at noon, meeting another absence of monk who is not coming up at the same time. There is a mighty but silent collision, and after picking themselves out of the dust, the two rewrap themselves in robes of saffron and repair to the sacred brothel, in which there are only virtual girls.
  1.  
    A train leaves Chicago station at 2:45 and a hang glider enthusiast jumps off a cliff on Tuesday. Who gets there first? Please show your work.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsaner
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    The enthusiast, a train is not a who.
  2.  
    Posted By: sanerThe enthusiast, a train is not a who.


    Right, as everyone knows Who's on first.
  3.  
    If a Who is not a who, then who did Horton hear?
    • CommentAuthorjoshs
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    Posted By: Knuckles OToole
    Posted By: sanerThe enthusiast, a train is not a who.


    Right, as everyone knows Who's on first.
    Well, sometimes his wife comes and picks it up.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    Posted By: sanerThe enthusiast, a train is not a who.


    Gets where?
  4.  
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: sanerThe enthusiast, a train is not a who.


    Gets where?


    Yes.
    • CommentAuthortinker
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    The sound of one monk crapping.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    Prop.
    • CommentAuthorenginerd
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    A riddle:

    Q: What is the difference between a duck?
    A: One leg is both the same.

    The question in this riddle was developed by Adrian Monk (a fictional television detective) while he was looking in the encyclopedia for a picture of a Bodai tree.

    The answer was the result of Intelligent Design working through typing MONKeys.
  5.  
    Every time someone asks "where energy go?"

    Another layer added to Obama's Birth certificate.

    (quoted from an anonymous user at Chirp)
    •  
      CommentAuthoroak
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    I like that.

    Where energy go?
  6.  
    Chirpers do cheat, what can i say?
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2012
     
    Chirper, chirper, cheat, cheat.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroak
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2012
     
    chirp. . . .chirp
    chirp. . . .chirp
    chirps. .. .chirp
    • CommentAuthorVibrator
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2012 edited
     
    No, to get gain, B would have to change in the same direction as H, before H changes. And that my shaky friend does not happen.
    There's other variables too that could be unrealistically tweaked to provide gain. You work through the possibilities till you find one that IS realistic. But i'm not and haven't talked about gain - only loss, as it pertains to Sv.
    • CommentAuthorVibrator
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2012
     
    Posted By: joshs
    Posted By: VibratorAnd, so, having been utterly fed up with everyone else's attempts to understand the issue, it'd be fascinating to know how far the Jury got with it, if anywhere... Dr MacDonald states there was at least one member actively playing around with the theory so, as the elected representative, and not least as an interested engineering physicist, he ought to have an opinion here...
    Maybe you missed the part where the errors of that individual were ultimately pointed out by other jury members.


    I wasn't talking about putative gains, just definite losses, and their thermodynamic properties. I don't think you've understood my question...
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2012
     
    Please repeat it then, since it wasn't stated in this thread.
    • CommentAuthorVibrator
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2012 edited
     
    Well pay attention then, for the nth time:


    Forget entropic losses for a moment so we have a clean example - suppose we have two low-lag magnets like neos, we let them slowly attract together from some initial distance and measure that energy as F X D. Then we prise them apart back to the same starting distance, again measuring the work.

    Because we've taken a closed loop through a magnetic field, our trajectory has yielded zero energy - what we gained on the way in we paid out to exit.

    If however one or both magnets have appreciable Sv, then their magnetisation will continue to rise for some time after they've attracted together. Then, when we come to separate them, we'll have to overcome this greater force to return them to their starting positions.


    So in both scenarios the magnets travel the same total distance around their curves, but in the latter example the delay has reduced the amount of output work, while keeping the input work maximised. Thus the interaction (the mechanical / MPE conversion) is lopsided, and the loss (of output energy) is due to a reduced force (a delayed increase) caused by the domain lag during the output workload.

    Not a spontaneous creation of heat on the input workload. Which of course would indeed be overunity...

    eta: and in case you missed it, this would be interesting because it's thermodynamically under-unity in exactly the same sense that the reversed asymmetry would be OU - it's the same class of interaction, inverted.

    In and of itself it's also noteworthy in that the additional input work required (over the output work left untapped) is a function of magnetic force and distance - in other words it's interesting precisely because it's not heat loss. In principle you could dump any amount of mechanical energy into it without converting any of it to heat... it's effectively energy sunk into a magnetic field.