I really love it here and I don't want to loose any more privileges. I've revised the question but it only got me more down votes. It is with in the scope of this sight but 5 people out of 1000s decided it was off topic. Once on hold or closed the question is practically dead. Can some one actually help me with this question instead of shooting me down? I' will read and up vote 3 of you questions. I learn here and I am learning that the system is intolerant. Don't you want to pop up on top every time on google?

Does Tesla make anything that didn't work like this divise?

| |
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ As engineers or scientists we sometimes tie ourselves in knots arguing with the religious, in the general sense of the word. We are trained to only accept verifiable facts, the religious world view is based on personal belief, i.e. this is true no matter what the facts are. My personal experience is that it is pointless arguing with these people from a factual base, you are not going to change what they believe. Just tell them to go away and shut the door in their face. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Dec 17 '17 at 13:34
  • \$\begingroup\$ You seem to have learned nothing from your meta question electronics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6331/4512. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Dec 17 '17 at 15:07
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I am going to use all this to restructure and rethink all my questions. \$\endgroup\$ – user103579 Dec 17 '17 at 18:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RoyC whenver I encounter them at my door, I think god must have given them a purpose for their existence, so I decide to have a little fun with them... \$\endgroup\$ – PlasmaHH Dec 18 '17 at 20:01

The basic problem is that your question is largely incomprehensible babble, and what we can understand seems like nonsense physics.

Nonsense physics can be OK if its clear you understand Real Physics, and want to know why something is wrong. For example, "I know this can't work as advertised since it's a perpetual motion machine, but where exactly is the gotcha?". Could be OK here if its electronically oriented. Otherwise it should probably be on physics.se.

One reason nobody is taking you seriously, and everyone piles on to downvote your questions to oblivion, is because you are espousing nonsense physics, and seem to expect answers in that context. Even if not, it makes a question too much trouble to answer. Such questions would likely be met with arguments anyway, as they first have to dispel religious beliefs. We do engineering here, which must be properly grounded in real physics. We don't want to waste our time, nor let the site be polluted, with nonsense physics.

Another factor is that your writing is poor to the point of being annoying to read. That indicates a sloppy attitude on your part. Details are important in engineering. Showing you don't care about the details shows that you aren't really ready to do engineering. We've also learned from experience that sloppy people don't make good engineers. Our limited volunteer time here is better spent on someone that is really trying, and can benefit from our help.

To be more specific, here is your post with detailed comments:

Magnets have what they call a flux.

Red flag right here. First, you're supposed to be asking not pontificating. The more you try to lecture us, the more you look like a weenie, and the more you run the risk of being wrong. Answering a question where the OP first starts out by trying to "teach" us bad science is much harder than otherwise. I usually just vote to close, downvote, and move on.

The reason you look like a weenie here is because it sounds like a great revelation to you that magnets have "flux", to the point you think many others won't know that.

It also shows sloppy thinking or at least sloppy writing. What does it mean for a magnet to "have" flux? A magnet produces a magnetic field, and one way to describe that magnetic field is in terms of flux. But, it seems you don't get that, and probably have a very poor idea of what magnets and flux really are. That makes answering a question on a different but related topic way too difficult to bother with. It would have to start with teaching what magnets really are before getting to the actual answer. That's way too much work, and unlikely to be successful anyway.

That is the virtual photons that come out of the poles of it.

"Virtual photons"!!? What the...? You clearly have no concept at all what magnets are nor what a magnetic field is. And worse, you're making up nonsense physics with "virtual photons". Real photons have little to do with magnets. I can't even guess what virtual photons are supposed to be.

This isn't even a real sentence. The verb is missing. "The virtual photons that come out of ..." what?

So not only is this about nonsense physics, it's incomprehensible babble on top of that.

Neodymium magnets loss about 5% over 100 years.

Do you mean "lose"? If this were the only problem with the writing, it would be easily overlooked. But, this is just heaping on more sloppiness on babble on nonsense.

Is it truly impossible to use magnets in this way?

In what way? You haven't described any use of magnets.

The virtual photons are essential in producing electricity.

ROFL. This is getting ridiculous. More pontificating, and it's about nonsense physics.

It seems you aren't really asking anything at all. You heard a few physics terms, think you've uncovered some novel idea by stringing them together in random ways, and want us to marvel at your brilliance. You really need to understand how ridiculous that is. In reality, we're laughing at the nonsense and clumsiness, while at the same time thinking "What a waste of time. We need to get this bozo off our site.".

Tesla invented a engine labeled and patented the Electric generator using only magnets to produce electricty.

More pontificating, and clear misunderstanding of physics. Magnets are important in a electric generator, but to say that a generator "only" uses magnets is misleading at best. Without acknowledgement that the power comes from motion, this hints strongly of a perpetual motion machine coming.

In any case, how is it relevant what Tesla invented or patented, or what he called it? We are a good way into the overall question, yet I don't see anything being asked about.

It uses a large magnetic field to spin a smaller magnets to produce electricity.

More pontificating. Ask something already! I really don't want to waste my time reading The world according to Muze. Also "a smaller magnets" isn't English.

Then this is more nonsense physics. The magnetic field doesn't somehow "spin smaller magnets" to produce electricity. You clearly have no concept of how a voltage or current is induced in a conductor due to a changing magnetic field. Even worse, this rant (it hasn't been much of a question so far) indicates that trying to teach you the Real Physics will likely be met with resistance. You didn't learn it in high school, so there is about 0 chance you'll learn it from a few paragraphs of a answer here.

Keep in mind The magnets are arranged to make the motor and they are not perpetual and will loose there flux faster under stress and they will have to be changed over time like batteries.

What the ...? Just trying to parse this mess of a English sentence is too much trouble and too error-prone. It's not clear what you are trying to say, but it sounds like more nonsense physics.

Take 2 magnets and push the 2 north poles together and the resistance is energy.

It does take energy to push the north poles of two magnets together. Whether that's what you really mean by "resistance is energy" is quite unclear. It almost seems like you accidentally said something that might be correct, but that may not be what you meant.

Can the virtual photons be manipulated into rotational torque or his invention crap?

Finally, a actual question! However, now we're back to these undefined "virtual photons". Since only you know what those are (and even that's not clear), we can't possibly say if they can be manipulated, and whether such manipulation can yield "rotational torque" (as apposed to what, linear torque? What is "rotational" trying to tell me here?).

So the question is asking whether this undefined thing can be done to fictional particles, or instead something else is crap. You really should be able to see for yourself how non-sensical that is.

In short, your question was correctly closed, and it should be downvoted to oblivion. You have been locked out from asking more questions here very good reason. You simply don't belong here.

Go away. Stop wasting our time and volunteer energy.

| |
  • \$\begingroup\$ I thank you. You really went beyond to help me with this. I am addicted to SE and in order to stay I will use your advise. \$\endgroup\$ – user103579 Dec 17 '17 at 18:15
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Awesome answer. Thank you for taking the time to write this down, it was entertaining as usual, just a bit longer! It's like the engineer's answer to Reddit's RoastMe. \$\endgroup\$ – pipe Dec 17 '17 at 23:05
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That whole virtual photons thing is a fallout from the actual bleeding edge physical theories being too complex for the people to understand, and then they pick a few words that seem familiar and try to make sense out of it. In quantum mechanics and particle interaction there is indeed a concept of virtual particles (actually even an infinite number of them per interaction) and the photon being the gauge boson of the electromagnetism appears as a virtual particle there too. However this has absolutely nothing to do with real world engineering. \$\endgroup\$ – PlasmaHH Dec 18 '17 at 20:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @PlasmaHH You seem the person I need to help me better understand my invention. I understand how magnetic field work dealing with magnetic entrapment, magnetic friction and vortexes and how to have a working machine with no touching parts to produce electricity. I need someone who can help me with this? Could you (and others invited) chat? \$\endgroup\$ – user103579 Dec 21 '17 at 21:41

Assuming you are a student in primary school, which is the only conclusion we can draw from the quality of your questions, my recommendation would be to do school work: pay attention in your classes, do homework, and learn the subjects that your teachers are trying to teach you.

I learn here and I am learning that the system is intolerant.

You don't seem to be learning. I recall seeing your profile on Physics.SE a year ago, when you were banned, and your questions don't seem to have improved.

Yes, the system is intolerant of low-quality questions, and that's by design. These sites have a minimum expectation of quality, and are not a dumping ground for anyone's random uninformed philosophizing. You have been told this repeatedly, on every SE site that you've graced with your presence.

The questions you've asked on these sites show a serious lack of comprehension -- they are a mishmash of hypothetical musings (pardon the pun) strung together completely at random. You will learn nothing from asking these types of questions. They are useless to you, to the site, and to anyone else who visits them.

| |

You really need an education in electricity and magnetism up to the point where you can understand Maxwell's Equations before even thinking about Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Electrodynamics (virtual photons).

| |

You must log in to answer this question.