[geocentrism] Re: Corrected Goofs
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 09:07:21 +1000
Allen you are still avoiding the key issue. It is not important how the rotor
was imobilised, but it is a most important point that it was immobilised,
something in which you goofed again in trying to demonstrate your theory. You
did not declare that important point.
"not because how is important, but because I need to be sure you really meant a
locked stator/rotor." ..What? I know it is not importaint, that is my
point...how is irrelevant.........whether welded or just plain old "mechanical
resistance" it is one and the same condition wrt motion?!.....If you state that
how is not importaint then what is your question?...any way you lock it it will
demonstrate a identical condition....NO ABILITY TO ROTATE.....
....I STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU REAED AGAIN WHAT I JUST GAVE YOU VERY VERY SLOWLY
BEFORE YOU BLOW IT OFF AS "GARBLED STUFF" ....How can anyone read it concisely
when you make such confusing words. Your NO ABILITY TO ROTATE.....is
unconditional, like most of your sentences, badly defined.. An unenergised
motor is free to rotate, or it is not a motor. ...
from the information you originally stated, and still do on your corrected
diagram, the motor is a motor, un energised, and as such has a rotor that is
free to move independently of the stator.. As such I was correct, despite your
ongoing unsupported arguments to the contrary, in stating- THE DISC WOULD NOT
KEEP ITS SAME FACE TO THE CENTRE DOT. AND THAT IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES YOU WERE
IN ERROR.
Will you acknowledge that first. Then we can continue discussing your demo.
Phil
Other related posts:
