C1ay

Only the phone tap is filtered to keep you from having to listen to the data. Internally a typical filter is just some inductors and a capacitor or two on the phone side to attenuate bands used on the network.

I believe so based on my own experiments with a 3 value system... In the '70s I was very intrigued with the birth of electronic computing. I was building my own logic gates from collections of various transistors and studying how it all worked. Processors of the time were coming out and most were built entirely using NMOS transistors or from PMOS transistors. NMOS circuits usually assigned Ve+ to the value 1 and 0V as 0. This was typically referred to at the time as positive logic. PMOS circuits on the other hand usually assigned Ve- to the value 1 and 0V as 0 and this was referred to as negative logic. As I played with these on my breadboard I wondered why you couldn't mix them and use a power supply that provided Ve+, 0 and Ve-. The system would still be digital, as opposed to analog, and the capacity of a byte would be exponentially increased with the application of a ternary system made possible by combining technologies. I was excited by the possibilities. At the time I used a cassette tape recorder to save and load programs for my computer, a Sinclair ZX80. I did some math and found that a binary to ternary converter could pack about 25 times as much information on tape. I built a small proof of concept circuit to produce some ternary values and successfully recorded them on tape. I thought this would have a big impact on storage and transmissions. I envisioned future processors that used ternary logic for increased computing power and efficiency over their binary counterparts. I went to speak to a patent attorney for some advice on how to proceed. He advised that electronic patents were some of the most expensive because of the requirements to look for prior works with an in depth patent search. The patent search he explained would be the most costly part of seeking any kind of related patent and quoted me an initial price of $500 just to look for any existing binary to ternary converters. It took me a few years actually to save up for this and when I finally got it done he found several patents dating back years. That let the wind out of my sails on my pursuit of what I called trinary logic at the time. To this day I see no usage of any such technology. I still think it could be used in some areas like digital transmissions over copper. I think it could be useful in certain processors since it would allow ternary algorithms and operations that might be more efficient in some cases over their binary counterpart. It puzzles me sometimes why I see nothing that utilizes it.

Just accessed with chrome now and got no warning. Perhaps all is well.

This is something I find myself having to be particularly careful of. There are a number of harmful species, like black widows and bark scorpions, that I will handle and I have to be careful to not give the impression that anyone can handle these animals because someone that it is unaware of the triggers that make these animals bite or sting will inadvertently set off one of those triggers.

That was enough for me to quit reading. The world is not fair and debates on economic systems should not be based on such.

I personally think you are only born with 2 fears, the fear of falling and the fear of loud noises, all other fears are learned. I suspect your mother and/or father were afraid of spiders and they taught you to be as well. In support, it has been my personal experience in handling spiders of many kinds and sizes that a majority of children want to pet them when they see me handle them and a majority of adults want to leave the area.

Get civil!!! Or it might mean plenty of other things. It's just a picture with lots of undefined definition. As it is it is pretty meaningless and posting it as some kind of dire warning is nothing but FUD.

Sieverts perhaps?

How?

It looks to me like The Liberty Beacon reran the graphic in this article that originated here.

This chart may be useful: Credit: xkcd.com

Here are the results of my experiment: Here are the components... Here they are assembled... Here I am nudging a ball bearing towards the hole in the assembly to see if a magnetic field is present... I conclude that there is a magnetic field present on the shielded side of the magnet.

No one here has lied about anything. Grow up!!!

And right there is the proof that you haven't any idea what you're even talking about. A round hole passing through a body like a magnet for the purpose of providing a passage for fluid to pass through it is an annular orifice. If you take a round magnetic shield and put a hole through the middle of it then it becomes a toroid and therefore a toroidal magnetic shield. That said I can tell you exactly how to see the field lines of your magnet and the effects your shield would cause to those field lines. A bar magnet and a small piece of steel will work in general but I recommend to procure a small ring magnet from a local hobby or crafts shop, and a steel washer for a bolt that is similar in dimension to your magnet. Next you will need to find an old TV set or computer monitor with a CRT display. WARNING: This will likely ruin the CRT for watching TV or use as a monitor. If you power on the crt and hold the magnet up close to it you will see the magnetic field just the way you see it in Mr. Hoadly's diagrams. Once you've examined the fields of the magnet by itself you can place a washer on one end and observe the effects. It is a very simple experiment that will allow you to actually see in real time what is going on. I'll make another small point here that is ultimately the flaw in your theory. You are trying to use a magnetic shield on a bipolar magnet to make it behave like a monopole magnet. Lots of magnetically driven continuous motion mechanisms could be possible with a true monopole magnet but they don't exist. Lots of people before you have tried the same approach you have only to learn it won't work. That's why there are no such machines on the market. You are not the first and not the last to see what might be possible with a monopole. Unfortunately you cannot convert a bipole into a monopole and for that reason your theory will never work. Good luck in your endeavors to learn more about science.

Let me be perfectly blunt here. Your 2nd, 3rd and 4th images here show an assertion that a magnetic shield blocks 100% of the magnetic field of the magnetic pole where it is positioned. None of your provided links support this claim so get busy finding some. I'm demanding proof that a toroidal magnetic shield blocks 100% of the magnetic field emanating from the poles of the annular orifice of a ring shaped magnet as your drawings assert. Prove this assertion or withdraw it. My own experiments with a real ring magnet, a toroidal shield and a steel bearing have shown to falsify this assertion of yours.

Let me add another question. What effect, if any, do you think your external toroidal magnetic shield has on the field internal to the annular orifice passing through the magnet?

Let me add something here that maybe you can explain. I have some ring shaped magnets leftover from a project of mine. I took one of them and attached a metal washer to one side. I stood it on edge on the table. I set a small ball bearing on the table on the washer side, let go of it and it jumped across the gap and stuck to the washer. On the other hand your depiction shows no lines of flux extending beyond the shield. What caused my ball bearing to jump the gap if a magnetic shield with a hole in it blocks all lines of flux?

I would not expect these conditions at all. Please provide some supporting links for these depictions.

You're talking to a senior administrator of this site that has the power to demand that you follow the rules here and I owe you NO explanation as to who I am. Yes, I do have the power and the right to suspend or banish you for not following those rules and you don't get any say whatsoever in how I interpret them, especially since I helped write them, with a specific goal in mind that we have rules to limit the claims of people like PPM trolls by making them support their claims. With that said do note that all of your shield diagrams are flawed in making predictions from your theory. You show magnets with a solid shield in front of them and then you show a tube passing through the center of it. None of your magnetic shield diagrams show how it would, or would not, effect the lines of flux in the field with a hole right in the middle of that shield for the field to pass through and your tubing to pass through. Now, you're far from done. Your iron plate with a hole in it is effectively an iron pipe. I think maybe you should look at how an iron pipe will affect the lines of flux in your magnets field.

You seem to have the mistaken idea that your magnetic shield somehow reduces the overall magnitude of the magnetic field of your magnet. It does not, it simply keeps that field from permeating a region of space beyond the shield but it does not reduce the strength of that field. The total magnitude of the magnetic field of the magnet is still there but one pole is just concentrated in the space in front of the shield, in the throat of your hollow magnet. Any fluid exposed to a hole in that shield still has the full repulsive force of that end of the magnet as it passes through the magnetic shield so your shield doesn't create the imbalance you think it does on the diamagnetic fluid.

I do have my facts straight. The lines of flux leaving the magnet are the same in both directions. Fluid passing the magnetic shield and entering the throat of the magnet will encounter an equal and opposite force of flux than that you assert pushes the fluid. Your shield doesn't block any flux lines between the center line of the magnet and the shield itself. In that region of space the flux is equal and opposite the other pole of the magnet. See the boxed in region in the attachment.