Klaynos

There's a few points I want to make here. Yes provide your equation but also how you can't up with it. Your numbers seem pretty meaningless, where are the units? Without a fully or even mostly formed mathematical model how do you possibly think this idea can displace Newtonian or Einsteinian gravity? Also you should look into the skill of concise writing. Otherwise people won't read your writings.

Guess you can't answer my question then. Also electrons don't orbit.

Pretty much why I support the licence fee.

A few years ago the BBC was the largest news gathering broadcaster in the world. Reuters is another of the very big news gatherers, it's unsurprising that they're a common source. The BBC has a legal requirement to be unbiased and whilst not everyone agrees that they get that right they do a much better job than some other news agencies I'm sure we could all name.

Whether you or any other person thinks it's ridiculous doesn't really matter. Experiments show that that is how the universe behaves. The universe doesn't care about the thoughts of a group of air descendents on a small green planet orbiting an unremarkable star.

! Moderator Note Moved to speculations. Please review the extra rules and guidelines stickied in the forum for speculations. On the forum can you show, numerically, how from your idea you can find the height of a geosyncrones orbit around the earth?

If your premise is breaking the laws of physics you can draw any conclusion you want. It won't be meaningful though.

! Moderator Note Two lines that look similar doesn't meet the requirements of this forum. Please do not reintroduce this topic. If you feel at some later point that you can address the evidence requirements you may petition a moderator to reopen this thread.

I do odd bits of soldering for Arduino projects. I've just bought myself a pretty cheap iron from Amazon. The tip size might be important depending on what you're trying to do. There's lots of videos online. Most of what I do at home is pins through holes with the occasional link, they take seconds. At work we've a more professional set up which does make the difficult small jobs easier. Therefore, my advise would be to not spend too much unless you've got some tough job or it's going to be a frequent activity.

! Moderator Note Seven pages and no evidence has been produced (see posts above asking for graphs showing comparisons to observations and NFW profile). Final chance before the thread gets closed. Please do not respond to this modnote in thread.

Why do you think space time must have mass? Your idea hangs on this and I don't think it's true.

Thanks.

Can you provide a link to peer reviewed journal article?

Newtons laws are approximations. In physics, laws are subsets of theories. Theories are the pinnacle of physical endeavour they are well tested and part of that means understanding their domain of applicability, assumptions and limitations.

As with most commercial aviation accident causes, incidents are rare. It's impossible to deal with every eventuality.

There's a list here http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_by_pilot There have been a few due to pilots on commercial airliners.

! Moderator Note That's not how science works, theories are the top of the triangle, they are well tested using quantitative, falsifiable predictions. We also expect some of this from people posting in our speculations section. Please reread our guidelines on the speculations section. Can you please answer Swansont's pretty simple question, in principle is your idea falsifiable?

As I see it, from your posts your idea rests on three things: The force required to keep it going being small due to the "iron" being light enough. When talking about over unity devices you cannot ignore forces like this, they're killers. Having a frictionless plate. This doesn't exist, you also have air resistance, saying it'll just be low friction so it can be disregarded is not going to work for this kind of device, those forces are killers. Not having any horizontal resistance between the magnet and metal plate, that's not how it works, you get resistance, especially around edges. These forces will ALWAYS result in your system slowing to a stop. If you need to give it a helping hand that's where the system energy is coming from, the energy out will always equal less than the energy you use to set it up and keep it going. Members have attempted to explain this to you and get you to do simple force diagrams. You've not provided enough information to do a proper analytical analysis and it doesn't look like you will. ! Moderator Note Given this is an energy from nothing machine and the thread isn't going anywhere I'm closing it. Build one, if you can make it run for more than a year report this post and we'll reopen the thread with some schematics so we can properly analyse the energies involved. Until then do not reintroduce this topic.

I think the working world of scientists is very different to what you think. Jobs are very insecure, resources more so. In academia they both require you to win grants which is competitive, if you win one and don't get anywhere before it ribs out (normally 1 to 3 years) you're unlikely to get the next. Science funding on most counties is being cut and more emphasis is being put on short term practical users rather than the fundamentals. Your understanding of simulation in physics also seems flawed, it is a mathematical model where certain new assumptions ate implemented, the results of the simulation are then compared to reality, that's how DM was discovered, the simulations without it don't look like the universe. Simulation is part of the story so far and will continue to be there.

You've asked a lot of very involved questions here. It won't surprise me of the thread gets confused. A magnetic field is a relativistic effect of an electric field. Magneto statics can be studied, as can electrostatics, but they are fundamentally entwined, you always need charge. Flow of charge. Depends on the situation. Lightning has a much higher potential difference compared to say car battery sparking. It depends. Ferromagnetism (and ferry, para et...) are complicated, you need to know a lot about the atomic structure of the solid to understand this on a fundamental level. Electromagnetic wave/photons of a wavelength that is visible to a human. Because that's what our is, a bootstrapping wave of E and B fields. Something that exhibits wave type properties. Things oscillate. Sometimes they process as they oscillate. This is a BIG subject, a forum post couldn't hope to do or justice. Sound is a wave. Light is a wave. Light an electromagnetic phenomena. Force is the rate of change of momentum. Waves can transfer momentum. Heat is energy transfer. Waves can transfer energy. Force is the differential of energy. (Ish) None, it cannot propagate in vacuum. Most of these answers are pretty vague generalisations. You'd need specifics and maths for much more.

TRILLIAN: It was very uncomfortable. I prefer something with far longer arms. ARTHUR: But which is probably quite incapable of drinking coffee!

Assuming "M" is rest mass your statement is true. The second equation is a simplification of the first when p=0 It's worth being careful with phrases such as moving and not moving as motion is relative.

Someone negatively reped a post where you just disregard evidence opposing your claim. Looks appropriate to me.

Your rep, both positives and negatives come from a wide range of members.

Sorry for such a severe snip but if this is the case what is the point of this thread?