On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense. Plain fact is that with proper implementation the wheel keeps on moving. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50Aag0J0Qe4&t=14s
Note the comments.
It has been rotating for one month.
My analysis has also been presented online.

The image at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#/media/File:Overbalanced_wheel.svg
shows this well. Of the 12 weights, 7 are on the left/blue side, 4 are
on the right/red side (one is straight down, zero net torque). The
torques are represented by the lengths of the colored lines from the
center line. The more numerous blue lines are shorter than the red lines
and the torques cancel out.

Rubbish. See the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50Aag0J0Qe4&t=14s
Street kids are now using it to drive generators.
I have calculated that a 1 GW power station would be 1500*1500sqm and cost $500 million.
That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

A Bhaskara perpetual motion wheel with fluid in tubes is similar, just
the points on the wheel where the fluid shifts ends in the tubes are different.

Mercury should be used there, in the original wheel.
The torque generated would be really good.
In the original wheel, the spokes would contain mercury.
The centre of gravity causing the torque would operate over a greater distance (away from the axle) on one side.
And that is how gravity would be the eternal force moving the wheel for eternity, bar external inferference.

Snake oil salesmen have been suckering the gullible for centuries.
Bhaskara's wheel doing so for some 900 years, including fellow Indian Banerjee.

Not at all - the West was always and is backward with respect to the East, barring a period when they started robbing recklessly all over the world
to get the money to have wars that required their best minds to produce improved technology, even with shonky physics.
Now those times are gone, and they are not even reproducing adequately!

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

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

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>

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

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

The Pen(is)nino chap is just that... confuses installed capacity with consumption. Idiot.

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>

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

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >> >> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >> >> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >> >> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >> >> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

The Pen(is)nino chap is just that... confuses installed capacity with consumption. Idiot.

Typical know nothing crackpot response, electric companies sell energy,
not power crackpot.

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>

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

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >> >> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >> >> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >> >> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

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

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >> >> >> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >> >> >> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >> >> >> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >> >> >> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >> >> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

This is a typical response of a delusionally insane crackpot.

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

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 15:31:13 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >> >> >> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >> >> >> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >> >> >> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >> >> to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

This is a typical response of a delusionally insane crackpot.

No worries, street kids playing around with soda bottles and old bike wheels will set your kind straight in due course. So you will be less idiotic, and maybe learn better manners.

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

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 15:38:10 UTC+11, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 15:31:13 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >> >> >> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >> >> >> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

This is a typical response of a delusionally insane crackpot.

No worries, street kids playing around with soda bottles and old bike wheels will set your kind straight in due course. So you will be less idiotic, and maybe learn better manners.

https://www.facebook.com/greatdiyidea/videos/603231088687771

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

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 15:31:13 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >> >> >> >> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >> >> >> to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

This is a typical response of a delusionally insane crackpot.

No worries, street kids playing around with soda bottles and old bike wheels will set your kind straight in due course. So you will be less idiotic, and maybe learn better manners.

Well since it has been 900 years so far and no energy has been produced
yet, I'm not holding my breath crackpot.

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

On Wednesday, 4 October 2023 at 00:01:12 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 15:31:13 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >> >> >> >> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >> >> >> >> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

This is a typical response of a delusionally insane crackpot.

No worries, street kids playing around with soda bottles and old bike wheels will set your kind straight in due course. So you will be less idiotic, and maybe learn better manners.

Well since it has been 900 years so far and no energy has been produced
yet, I'm not holding my breath crackpot.

Who cares about your breath, idiot.

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

On Wednesday, 4 October 2023 at 00:01:12 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 15:31:13 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 14:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 13:01:11 UTC+11, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >> >> >> >> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >> >> >> >> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

It jolly well works as the video shows, idiot.

Only a delusionally insane crackpot would think that, crackpot.

Only a racist+bigoted brainwashed-from-birth sad entity would think otherwise, idiot.

This is a typical response of a delusionally insane crackpot.

No worries, street kids playing around with soda bottles and old bike wheels will set your kind straight in due course. So you will be less idiotic, and maybe learn better manners.

Well since it has been 900 years so far and no energy has been produced
yet, I'm not holding my breath crackpot.

***
On Sunday, 1 October 2023 at 13:57:38 UTC+11, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Sunday, 1 October 2023 at 09:31:53 UTC+11, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Sunday, 1 October 2023 at 00:00:39 UTC+10, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

Simple enough for any engineer to understand, but not for the dogmatic sorts.
Some kid has made that sort of wheel run a generator which lights a bulb and runs a fan.
That is on Facebook, believe it or not.
If it works, those who need small amounts of power can repeat what is shown there.
The busting of some dearly held beliefs by academics will be a by product.
Good.

https://www.facebook.com/3TechnologyVDO/videos/3726646404221033
This time, using a single powerful permanent magnet used in microwave ovens.

This puzzled me for a while. Was it a hoax? Now after working it out I do not think so, but I may need to explain. It is ingenious. Two screws are used with copper wire to form a reasonably powerful electromagnet, considering the steel cores. Now see

how they are placed in a NS-SN configuration. There is a very poweful permanent magnet, for the type used in microwave ovens, attached to the armature of a small DC generator. The output leads from the generator are connected to the two ends of the
electromagnets. A resistance is put to control the current. To begin with nothing happens, then it is jump started with a separate battery. After this jumpstart the battery is taken away and perpetual motion is established. The question now is, is this a
hoax and if so, how. Or, how is it done? Well, my thinking is that the electromagnets create a steady magnetic field, which is discontinous at the centre due to the way the winding is done. The North of the permanent magnet is pulled one way, and the
South is pushed, causing the rotation. But after half a turn, there should be repulsion causing it to stop? Why does it keep on rotating? My thought is that the inertia from the heavy permanent magnet keeps it moving, despite the force/torque that
opposes this motion for one half of the cycle when the magnetic fields try to stop it being opposed - north faces north and south faces south. If the resistance is too low, then more current will go through the electromagnet causing stronger magnetic
field which would make the permanent magnet move too fast, perhaps then causing some mishap. The energy is not really free, you have to put it all together - it is direct energy from the sun that is free!

And
https://www.facebook.com/greatdiyidea/videos/603231088687771

Amazing how street kids are wiser than all the bald (or not bald) beardos(or clean-shaven) in the Physics Departments of all the world's universities, great and small.
The One True God has a sense of humour.

Now this is really Divine, fixing those pompous fancypants atheistic-robotic e=mcc sorts as the most blithering imbeciles.
***

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

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >>> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >>> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >>> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:
"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average
residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per kilowatt-hour�(kWh)." (https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)�

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

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

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >>>> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >>>> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >>>> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense. >>

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:
"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh)." (https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/) 

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy
nor why putting a price on power is inane.

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

On 10/5/2023 10:12 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >>>>> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >>>>> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >>>>> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>>>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:
"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average
residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)."
(https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy
nor why putting a price on power is inane.

Not 100% inane. Huge industrial loads usually have a "demand" charge
based on peak power usage (actually kVA so a poor power factor is
penalized), because the transformers and power lines supplying the
facility cost quite a bit more than a 200A household feed.

But your point is clear and valid. Banerjee doesn't have a clue what
he's talking about.


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

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 10:12 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >>>>>> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >>>>>> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >>>>>> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >>>>>> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>>>>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >>>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >>>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot. >>>

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:
"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average
residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)."
(https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy
nor why putting a price on power is inane.

Not 100% inane. Huge industrial loads usually have a "demand" charge
based on peak power usage (actually kVA so a poor power factor is
penalized), because the transformers and power lines supplying the
facility cost quite a bit more than a 200A household feed.

Suppose I want 100 MW but I only want it for 2 femtoseconds?

But your point is clear and valid. Banerjee doesn't have a clue what
he's talking about.

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

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 00:32:15 UTC+11, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >>> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >>> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >>> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:

I do not. Pennino is being silly. And you are being sillier.
I meant and mean installed capacity, like say a 100MW coal plant costing say $100 million to install.
Which means, 100million joules of energy are generated every second.

That way, it will be 1 watt of pollution power installed at 1 dollar per watt, for a coal plant.

But it will need coal to run, and maintenance. It will create pollution.
So overall very expensive.

Magnetic force and gravity force do not need coal to run, nor oil, need very little maintenance, and do not pollute.
Magnetic force systems need expensive permanent magnets, so their use is limited.
Bhaskara wheels running on gravity, using plastic, lead and dc motors, will be much cheaper.
Like a system that will cost $500 million to generate 1000MW or 1 GW.

"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)." (https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

One kilowatt power is 1000 watts * 60*60 = 3600000 joules of energy costing 23 cents.
Okay. I pay about that much, too.
A one watt capacity provides 1 * 60 * 60 = 3600 joules in one hour
In one year it provides 3600*24*365 joules of energy.
That is 31536000 joules of energy.
Or, 23 * 31536000/3600000 = 201 cents.

A 1GW plant will generate thus $2*1000,000,000 dollars or two billion dollars per year.
Not bad, then, for a Bhaskara plant to generate 2 billion dollars per year with a 500 million dollar investment.

Something new!

Of course, the price of electricity will have to go down, as so much electricity will be made cheaply.
Only by reducing costs can they hope to sustain the grid, or else people will make their own energy at home with their own Bhaskara wheels.
From 23 cents to about 2 cents per unit.
And no pollution, either.

The extraordinary ignorance and stupidity of eurocentric racist and bigoted fools stands in the way.
Politically, they are too powerful, as there are so many of them, to obstruct anything worthwhile and decent.

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>

Twist, lie and abuse, typical western strategies about what upsets them.
Won't help much, with China coming up and even India is getting a bit pugnacious.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

The bow-wow chappie, barking for eurocentric superiority at all costs!

Remarkable for their astounding magnitude of pettiness and silliness, those sorry creatures that try to suppress
Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandhi) Banerjee, greatest genius of all time, sole god among lotsa devils.

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

On 10/5/2023 3:29 PM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 10:12 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >>>>>>> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >>>>>>> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >>>>>>> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>>>>>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >>>>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >>>>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot. >>>>

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:
"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average
residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)."
(https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy
nor why putting a price on power is inane.

Not 100% inane. Huge industrial loads usually have a "demand" charge
based on peak power usage (actually kVA so a poor power factor is
penalized), because the transformers and power lines supplying the
facility cost quite a bit more than a 200A household feed.

Suppose I want 100 MW but I only want it for 2 femtoseconds?

I'd like to see the meter which can record that accurately.

Going on very shaky memory, "demand" is actually measured as the maximum
15 minute (?) energy usage during the metered period, so even this
'power' is really an energy measurement, I guess. Complex energy, not
true energy, since reactive power still requires bigger transformers/cables/etc.

The power company is more interested in undersized transformers
overheating than what happens when you fire your 2 femtosecond laser pulse.

100 MW for 2 femtoseconds is 200 nanojoules so I'd doubt you'll trigger
any huge demand metering.

But your point is clear and valid. Banerjee doesn't have a clue what
he's talking about.

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

On 10/5/2023 4:54 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 00:32:15 UTC+11, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >>>>> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >>>>> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >>>>> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>>>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:

I do not. Pennino is being silly. And you are being sillier.
I meant and mean installed capacity, like say a 100MW coal plant costing say $100 million to install.
Which means, 100million joules of energy are generated every second.

That way, it will be 1 watt of pollution power installed at 1 dollar per watt, for a coal plant.

Bla bla bla.

You still can't explain why, in 900 years, *nobody* has been able to get Bhaskara's wheel to work. If it did, India would have beaten Europe to
the Industrial Revolution by some 500 years.

Bhaskara's wheel does work for its real purpose, of course. Which is to separate fools from their money.

The Chinese have been selling free energy motors for quite a while.

Leave it to the Chinese to rip off the perpetual motion motor suckers
like yourself. Even Alibaba is in on the act!

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

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 3:29 PM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 10:12 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >>>>>>>> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >>>>>>>> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >>>>>>>> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>>>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >>>>>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >>>>>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot. >>>>>

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive: >>>>> "The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average
residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)."
(https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy >>>> nor why putting a price on power is inane.

Not 100% inane. Huge industrial loads usually have a "demand" charge
based on peak power usage (actually kVA so a poor power factor is
penalized), because the transformers and power lines supplying the
facility cost quite a bit more than a 200A household feed.

Suppose I want 100 MW but I only want it for 2 femtoseconds?

I'd like to see the meter which can record that accurately.

A good friend of mine, now gone south, spent some time building machines
to provide mega volts at mega amps for short pulses across various
small metal wires to see what sort of particles emerged from the resulting plasma. He said the concrete building they were in shook a bit when it
fired off. Interesting stuff.

Going on very shaky memory, "demand" is actually measured as the maximum
15 minute (?) energy usage during the metered period, so even this
'power' is really an energy measurement, I guess. Complex energy, not
true energy, since reactive power still requires bigger transformers/cables/etc.

According to the California ISO web site, they monitor and project
generation and demand power in real time but price in terms of energy.

The power company is more interested in undersized transformers
overheating than what happens when you fire your 2 femtosecond laser pulse.

100 MW for 2 femtoseconds is 200 nanojoules so I'd doubt you'll trigger
any huge demand metering.

But your point is clear and valid. Banerjee doesn't have a clue what
he's talking about.

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

50 F-16s will win the war, win the war for Ukraine

50 F-16s in Ukraine wins and ends the war.

Volney leading F-16 squadron to Ukraine that wins the Ukraine War

Volney what is your squadron's name?
On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 5:35:52 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:

"little stinker"

Volney, what is your call sign??

Volney: "fucking barkdog"


███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃ Radio Wave & Laser Rifle to shoot down GLONASS and BeiDou satellites

Xi masses troops on Russian border to take back Outer Manchuria. If you do not know the history, Russia stole Outer Manchuria and Vladivostok from China.

While Putin is too busy with his personal war, Xi thinks time is ripe to get back what belongs to China in the first place. OUTER MANCHURIA and especially Vladivostok.

Xi gives the Chinese people a Christmas gift--- Outer Manchuria-- the beloved Old China

I am not positive we can take out GLONASS and BeiDou from ground based radio and microwaves and laser waves, even jamming.

But I am certain that we can put a satellite in orbit that is a wrecking ramming satellite that does take out GLONASS and BeiDou. I am certain of this because several countries have robotic satellites that maintenance their fleet of satellites. And to
this end, we need such a wrecking ball satellite immediately up there.

[Note, graphics found in sci.physics when Nomen Nescio used to spam sci.physics with a fake FAQ.]



███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃ ▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ I███████████████████]. ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...
Satellite RIFLE to shoot down GLONASS, Iran,and BeiDou satellites.
Hooray

Hooray!! End the Ukraine war

Easiest way to end the Ukraine invasion by Russia, start felling GLONASS satellites, fell them directly with radar laser pulses or jam them to fall.

Now I thought GLONASS Russian satellites numbered in the thousands, for the Internet is lousy on this question of how many satellites, for recently BBC was vague with a estimate of 600 satellites, yet another web site said 42,000. But apparently only 24
are operational for GLONASS. And my take on this is that satellites are precarious vessels and easily for something to go wrong and be inoperative. All the better to look for flaws in engineering to down all 24 GLONASS Russian satellites.

So, easy easy Achilles tendon in all of the Russian ICBM military strategy, for knock out the 24 and you in a sense, knock out the entire Russian ICBM arsenal, for they no longer have any navigation.

And if the West is on its top shape and form in technology, we want the West Scientists to figure out how to intercept the Russian ICBM and cause it to fall upon Russia and explode upon Russia.

Get the best electronics and electrical engineers of the West to figure out how to cause all Russian launched and Chinese launched ICBMs to explode on home territory.

Caveat: if the West can do it, mind you, the Chinese and Russians will want to steal those secrets from the West and that should never be allowed--Ultimate Top Secret classification that not even a punk weirdo president like Trump cannot see, nor mention
to him for he would likely sell it for a golf course in some foreign enemy country.

Google search reveals
24+
GLONASS (Globalnaya Navigazionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema, or Global Navigation Satellite System) is a global GNSS owned and operated by the Russian Federation. The fully operational system consists of 24+ satellites.Oct 19, 2021

Other Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) - GPS.govhttps://www.gps.gov › systems › gnss
About featured snippets
•
Feedback
People also ask
How many satellites are in the GLONASS?
As of 15 October 2022, 143 GLONASS navigation satellites have been launched, of which 131 reached the correct orbit and 24 are currently operational.

List of GLONASS satellites - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › List_of_GLONASS_sa...
Search for: How many satellites are in the GLONASS?
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Nov 5, 2022, 11:02:21 PM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃ Radio Wave--Laser Rifle felling BeiDou satellites

From what I gather on internet, Russia has 24 satellites in operation while BeiDou China has 35.

▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ I███████████████████]. ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...

Radio Wave-- LASER RIFLE to shoot down the premier BeiDou satellite.
Ending the dumb and stupid petty dictators launching rockets from North Korea.

It is respectfully request help from engineers in Japan to help fell the BeiDou satellites that navigate the illegal North Korea launches.


--- quoting Wikipedia ---
The BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS; Chinese: 北斗卫星导航系统; pinyin: Běidǒu Wèixīng Dǎoháng Xìtǒng) is a Chinese satellite navigation system. It consists of two separate satellite constellations. The first BeiDou system,
officially called the BeiDou Satellite Navigation Experimental System and also known as BeiDou-1, consisted of three satellites which, beginning in 2000, offered limited coverage and navigation services, mainly for users in China and neighboring regions.
BeiDou-1 was decommissioned at the end of 2012. The second generation of the system, officially called the BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) and also known as COMPASS or BeiDou-2, became operational in China in December 2011 with a partial
constellation of 10 satellites in orbit. Since December 2012, it has been offering services to customers in the Asia-Pacific region.

In 2015, China launched the third generation BeiDou system (BeiDou-3) for global coverage. The first BD

On Monday, October 2, 2023 at 10:01:11 PM UTC-4, Jim Pennino wrote:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on >> rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the >> center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so >> the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional
to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>

Didn't read through the rest, but Jim here has straightened me out on some whoppers, and I love whoppers. I used to always get those at the movies.

A good show will have to really get greedy in the bearings department... I have to confess that I am bearing challenged. Did you ever run a point bearing? It is as simple as sharpening a stick to a point and balancing an object on it. The requirements
are modest, and using a bowed branch they become trivial. Shall we say a bowed segment. Really, as I have addressed fundamental mathematics to what degree ought we to claim the lowly segment a supreme differential status? Perhaps this will form a new way;
a way that leaves the real line behind. As two how the three come do be; it is not only in RxRxR that we see this; and arguably this is a first and static form. Ah-hah. Thence the 4D flow off the three, and yet did your three then flew as two once upon?
What then of those stinking derivatives and why are there only two and wouldn't that then be three? Jerks aside, jerks ahead; jerks behind jerks by jerk's Jerks and jerks be gone in the three. Then comes the flow but till then yo the three won't be free.

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

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 3:31:11 PM UTC-4, Jim Pennino wrote:

Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 10:12 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >>>>>> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >>>>>> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >>>>>> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >>>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:
"The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average
residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)."
(https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy >> nor why putting a price on power is inane.

Not 100% inane. Huge industrial loads usually have a "demand" charge
based on peak power usage (actually kVA so a poor power factor is penalized), because the transformers and power lines supplying the facility cost quite a bit more than a 200A household feed.

Suppose I want 100 MW but I only want it for 2 femtoseconds?

But your point is clear and valid. Banerjee doesn't have a clue what
he's talking about.

Really. Probably #10 wire for that. Maybe use stranded, just because it bends easier.
Current sensing across the #10 will be quite natural if you have a couple of feet, say.
Right down to the last femptovolt. Got to get your precision going. Got to tune some caps.
It is a strange world out there, and I'm not sure that I've got it all quite right in my head yet.

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

On 10/6/2023 9:53 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 3:29 PM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 10/5/2023 10:12 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel >>>>>>>>> perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>>>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >>>>>>>>> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>>>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>>>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an >>>>>>>>> equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900
years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >>>>>>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot.

If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive: >>>>>> "The cost of electricity by state. As of February 2023, the average >>>>>> residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per
kilowatt-hour (kWh)."
(https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/)

The crackpot doesn't understand the difference between power and energy >>>>> nor why putting a price on power is inane.

Not 100% inane. Huge industrial loads usually have a "demand" charge
based on peak power usage (actually kVA so a poor power factor is
penalized), because the transformers and power lines supplying the
facility cost quite a bit more than a 200A household feed.

Suppose I want 100 MW but I only want it for 2 femtoseconds?

I'd like to see the meter which can record that accurately.

A good friend of mine, now gone south, spent some time building machines
to provide mega volts at mega amps for short pulses across various
small metal wires to see what sort of particles emerged from the resulting plasma. He said the concrete building they were in shook a bit when it
fired off. Interesting stuff.

Going on very shaky memory, "demand" is actually measured as the maximum
15 minute (?) energy usage during the metered period, so even this
'power' is really an energy measurement, I guess. Complex energy, not
true energy, since reactive power still requires bigger
transformers/cables/etc.

According to the California ISO web site, they monitor and project
generation and demand power in real time but price in terms of energy.

The power company is more interested in undersized transformers
overheating than what happens when you fire your 2 femtosecond laser pulse. >>
100 MW for 2 femtoseconds is 200 nanojoules so I'd doubt you'll trigger
any huge demand metering.

But your point is clear and valid. Banerjee doesn't have a clue what
he's talking about.

In case anyone cares, here's National Grid's explanation of demand
metering with a couple of examples. https://www9.nationalgridus.com/niagaramohawk/non_html/eff_elec-demand.pdf

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

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 14:30:05 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/5/2023 4:54 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 00:32:15 UTC+11, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more >>>>> weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which >>>>> is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot. >> If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:

I do not. Pennino is being silly. And you are being sillier.
I meant and mean installed capacity, like say a 100MW coal plant costing say $100 million to install.
Which means, 100million joules of energy are generated every second.

That way, it will be 1 watt of pollution power installed at 1 dollar per watt, for a coal plant.

Bla bla bla.

You still can't explain why, in 900 years, *nobody* has been able to get Bhaskara's wheel to work. If it did, India would have beaten Europe to
the Industrial Revolution by some 500 years.

Bhaskara's wheel does work for its real purpose, of course. Which is to separate fools from their money.

The Chinese have been selling free energy motors for quite a while.

Leave it to the Chinese to rip off the perpetual motion motor suckers
like yourself. Even Alibaba is in on the act!

No fool like a deliberately blind conceited fool, racist and bigoted with what wits it has - and such a fool is the moron Moroney.
He has tons of company, though.
Sad.

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

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 14:30:05 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/5/2023 4:54 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 00:32:15 UTC+11, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> >> On 2023-10-03 01:52:28 +0000, Jim Pennino said:

Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have >> >>>>> more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on
rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more
weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with >> >>>>> fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away >> >>>>> from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the
center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so
the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an
equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus >> >>>>> that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense.

Nope, it is a succinct analysis of why Bhaskara's wheel has never in 900 >> >>> years worked and why it will never work, though you are too delusional >> >>> to understand that, crackpot.

<snip>

That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

Electricity isn't priced by the watt but rather the watt*hour, crackpot. >> >> If by watt he means watt hour then 50 cents is incredibly expensive:

I do not. Pennino is being silly. And you are being sillier.
I meant and mean installed capacity, like say a 100MW coal plant costing say $100 million to install.
Which means, 100million joules of energy are generated every second.

That way, it will be 1 watt of pollution power installed at 1 dollar per watt, for a coal plant.

Bla bla bla.

You still can't explain why, in 900 years, *nobody* has been able to get
Bhaskara's wheel to work. If it did, India would have beaten Europe to
the Industrial Revolution by some 500 years.

Bhaskara's wheel does work for its real purpose, of course. Which is to
separate fools from their money.

The Chinese have been selling free energy motors for quite a while.

Leave it to the Chinese to rip off the perpetual motion motor suckers
like yourself. Even Alibaba is in on the act!

No fool like a deliberately blind conceited fool, racist and bigoted with what wits it has - and such a fool is the moron Moroney.
He has tons of company, though.

For 900 years??


Though you are not a deliberately blind conceited fool, just
delusionally insane.

Your are a racist and bigoted.

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

https://www.facebook.com/arindam.banerjee.31149359/videos/690084565977593

Violating the inertia principle automatically revises the fundamentals of physics.

Shown above

There will be very many positive outcomes.


On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 12:40:09 UTC+11, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 October 2023 at 02:26:45 UTC+11, Volney wrote:

On 10/2/2023 7:56 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

I did not write the following.

[]

In case anyone wants to know why the Bhaskara overbalanced wheel
perpetual motion machine won't work is this: A static wheel will have
more weights on one side than the other. The weights on this side are on rods hanging down for the most part. However, on the side with more weights, the weights are closer to the center while on the side with
fewer weights, the weights are at the ends of rods sticking out away
from the center. The torque from the fewer weights further away from the center counters the torque from the more weights closer to the center so the wheel has no reason to rotate other than possibly rock to an equilibrium. If rotating, the friction of the arms flopping over (plus
that of the central bearing) will dissipate the rotational energy which
is not being replaced by the zero net torque.

Pretentious pseudo-scientific garbage by the moron Moroney. Total nonsense. Plain fact is that with proper implementation the wheel keeps on moving. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50Aag0J0Qe4&t=14s
Note the comments.
It has been rotating for one month.
My analysis has also been presented online.

The image at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#/media/File:Overbalanced_wheel.svg
shows this well. Of the 12 weights, 7 are on the left/blue side, 4 are
on the right/red side (one is straight down, zero net torque). The
torques are represented by the lengths of the colored lines from the
center line. The more numerous blue lines are shorter than the red lines and the torques cancel out.

Rubbish. See the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50Aag0J0Qe4&t=14s Street kids are now using it to drive generators.
I have calculated that a 1 GW power station would be 1500*1500sqm and cost $500 million.
That is 1 watt of totally green power for 50 cents.

A Bhaskara perpetual motion wheel with fluid in tubes is similar, just
the points on the wheel where the fluid shifts ends in the tubes are different.

Mercury should be used there, in the original wheel.
The torque generated would be really good.
In the original wheel, the spokes would contain mercury.
The centre of gravity causing the torque would operate over a greater distance (away from the axle) on one side.
And that is how gravity would be the eternal force moving the wheel for eternity, bar external inferference.

Snake oil salesmen have been suckering the gullible for centuries. Bhaskara's wheel doing so for some 900 years, including fellow Indian Banerjee.

Not at all - the West was always and is backward with respect to the East, barring a period when they started robbing recklessly all over the world
to get the money to have wars that required their best minds to produce improved technology, even with shonky physics.
Now those times are gone, and they are not even reproducing adequately!

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

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