fidget spinner electric Ac generator :) and pulse motor powered with small solar panels

[sciencetoolbar]

thank you for your good thoughts cowboy bob.

 

[large_ghostman]

I got a couple of points to add to this thread, i havnt said much on it for a while and recent events have given me some perspective on some of the things.
We start with the teaching side.
When i joined this forum i was roughly the age range your aiming at with this stuff. Had i of come on here back then and asked for what i did, and someone like you had given two conflicting names to the same device, i would have been confused.

So point one. I dont care if you use your language or your own, but tell us if this is a generator or motor. Forget the fact that the principle can be used for both, what is important is you call the device by its correct name for the configuration it is in. Anything else is simply confusing and misleading.

One day a week I teach now! Actually the accurate description is I do a science outreach program in a primary school, i have no qualifications to teach. So i go in one day a week on average, and with the HEAD teacher, we come up with wacky science stuff to show the 10-12 year olds for the afternoon. We have done many things, some i have no idea how we get away with it, but the kids love it and i love doing it.

I have a simple brief from the Head teacher, he likes science but has zero knowledge having said that he is a great teacher. The rules i work too are.

It has to be reasonably safe to do, it has to be 100% safe for the kids to be around.
It has to be accurate, i cant go in with a generator and call it a motor all day, i cant go in with a motor and call it a generator.
It has to have value within the realm of science, this means it has to have a scientific principle behind it, it dosnt matter if the kids dont understand it. If they dont understand it then they must be enthralled by it.
So far to give you examples of what we have done.
We have got yeast to absorb FGP into the cytoplasm of Yeast cells, in other words we took Fluorescent Green Protein (actually we isolated that with them from fish a few weeks ago, and then cultured it), and got the yeast to absorb the protein into their cytoplasm. The kids dont know or care how that happens, but each kid now has at home a jar of yeast beads (we used aliginate to immobilize the yeast) that glows at night like a night light.

We have done a fidget spinner device similar to yours, fidget spinners were a real craze here before Christmas. But we felt it mattered that the kids understood there is no free lunch. So we set it up to spin on an axis. one side we put the same as you, a simple AC coil from a transformer winding. We put a current and voltage meter on it, that way they could see what was being used in terms of energy to power it.

The other side we put another coil connected to a bulb via another set of meters, this was so we could show how much energy the system could create. From this they learnt that using a motor to drive a generator incurs a loss of energy. It was extremely important to get across to them this principle, we live in an area where wind power is used extensively. The kids are (or were) under the impression this is free energy, the same as they thought the generator things you get on a bike produce free electric.

Now they understand that the energy has to come from somewhere, we explained with wind turbines the energy comes from the wind. We explained that on a bike the energy comes from the food they eat, and this energy is converted by them into muscle power to peddle the bike.

Then we proved that it takes more energy to turn the motor than can be produced by the other coil. YES I did use a JT to up the voltage to huge amounts, but equally they saw the drop in current when we did this.

You are teaching stupidity, for me personally what i find worse is your going to kill interest in science. Kids loose interest in things they cant believe then find out are not true. An example of this is my little sister who is 8. This was probably the last Christmas she will ever believe in father Christmas, she honestly thinks he buys the presents and gives them out. Its a kind of magic and has made christmas a wonderful experience for her over the last 8 years.

She will become like me next year, once she knows its a lie she will see it as a day where people spend money on each other and give gifts, yes getting together is special but the 'magic' goes. You are doing the same, you present things as if they are like magic, your building false interest in something that once found out, will teach one thing only.....Dont trust science or scientists because its all smoke and mirrors!

Instead you should embrace the principles, invent or make machines that explain a principle, what you build tend to be over complicated ways to explain very simple concepts. Eventually one of two things happen, you kill off interest in science because they wont trust it. Or they wont understand it and likely be the types to buy snake oil machines.

As i said I am allowed to do some pretty mad stuff with this class, its classed as outreach so i dont need to be qualified, i do it in conjunction with a teacher so the learning outcomes and paperwork is done correctly. But already a number of kids in that class love science! First experiment we did was set fire to the head teacher, he had cotton clothes on and bare arms and head, i got him to soak a tea towel and wipe himself all over with it. He wore safety glasses, then I filled up a huge barrel with soapy water and made loads and loads of TINY gas bubbles with a aquarium air stone and Butane gas bottle, the kids and I covered him in the soapy bubbles and I then set fire to him.

Woosh............no hard done . We then lined them up and put some the bubbles in there hands, the hands were wet first and we held a towel on there arm ready to pull down over the hand. Once they had a handful of bubbles i lit them.

Things like this are dangerous if you dont understand the principles behind them, we explained why we used small bubbles and not big ones. The flames were about the same size but the heat is less, with small bubbles you have more soap and water per volume of gas, this helps carry the heat off. I could have blown a huge butane bubbles, but the heat can be unpleasant. The best bit was the HT didnt know I was going to set fire to the bubbles .

That just added to the fun.

My point is, your age range of audience are at a special age, never again will they learn as fast. Its a very very special time in growth, dont mess up young minds. Build things that demonstrate the truth and dont mislead, or build things that mislead and then debunk them. Teach them science is TRUTH and not lies. Teach them to trust in and believe in science, also teach them most art teacher are really odd

 

[tcmtech]

Well put post all the way around!

Instead you should embrace the principles, invent or make machines that explain a principle, what you build tend to be over complicated ways to explain very simple concepts. Eventually one of two things happen, you kill off interest in science because they wont trust it.

Rather what killed theoretical mathematics (algebra and calculus bsd stuff) for me. In high school and evne college both times I had one inept nut job math teacher after another in that subject and it ruined it for me. They touted it as the greatest most valuable math I would ever learn yet utterly failed to put a single shred of legitimate value and accuracy to its place and value in day to day life even in the areas of engineering and fabrications/design work I enjoy the most that are at times quite math heavy.

Fortunately, my personal interests in physics and science and their applied day to day application gave me a solid platform of applied mathematics to work from which I use every single day in some form even now some 30 or so years later.

If its calle math and i uses the alphabet I have no use for it. That's not math, it's just really bad spelling.

You are teaching stupidity, for me personally what i find worse is your going to kill interest in science. Kids loose interest in things they cant believe then find out are not true. An example of this is my little sister who is 8. This was probably the last Christmas she will ever believe in father Christmas, she honestly thinks he buys the presents and gives them out. Its a kind of magic and has made christmas a wonderful experience for her over the last 8 years.

Yep, I remember that point in my life well too. I hated everyone who had lied to me for it and made it a point to never ever do that to any kid I had any say in their upbringing over. It's just stupid and cruel.

For me at that age range, I could never reconcile the fact that ol' santa somehow had all the money in the world to buy/build all these millions of gifts plus the power to see every good and bad thing I and everyone else did and judge me for them, yet no matter how good I was I still got crap presents while my classmates, who a few were outright lying pet murdering arsonistic little monsters, got the top end of everything dumped on them by the truckloads year after year.

The only thing I could come to see from that was that either santa hated poor/honest kids or he was the devil himself, and that's some pretty screwed up things for a 8 - 10 year old to be pondering on over christmas vacations.

My point is, your age range of audience are at a special age, never again will they learn as fast. Its a very very special time in growth, dont mess up young minds. Build things that demonstrate the truth and dont mislead, or build things that mislead and then debunk them. Teach them science is TRUTH and not lies. Teach them to trust in and believe in science, also teach them most art teacher are really odd

Yep. When you're working with the very building blocks at the begining of another person's life don't screw it up just to suite your own selfish and less than accurate views and wants. They will do that to themselves well enough on their own later in life.

 

[sciencetoolbar]

I got a couple of points to add to this thread, i havnt said much on it for a while and recent events have given me some perspective on some of the things.
We start with the teaching side.
When i joined this forum i was roughly the age range your aiming at with this stuff. Had i of come on here back then and asked for what i did, and someone like you had given two conflicting names to the same device, i would have been confused.
........

It is about : 1. fidget spinner generator and 2. pulse motor (PM) when if will put them together it will result.... Pulse motor generator 3. (PMG) ( fidget spinner gen 1. + pulse motor 2. ( solar panels + reed switch + bobbin ) you can find all the details here **broken link removed**

In conclusion you have 3 options :

1. build a fidget spinner generator - details on the mentioned website
2. build a pulse motor ( using a fidget spinner + a reed switch +.......) PM - details on the mentioned website
3. build a pulse motor generator ( combine 1. + 2. ) PMG .......



I saw an interesting article : https://indianexpress.com/article/i...chers-make-science-easy-and-exciting-4835207/
it is a start.....

Barba non facit philosophum ( refering to some teachers....)
Some times I like to push the limits of physics and some people are presenting me volumes and volumes of theory .....But where are the results ?. I know is written in the books.....
man kind is funny.....

 

[large_ghostman]

Seriously stop twisting what people say, give people more credit than you are doing.
People giving you volumes and volumes of theory??? NO, this is preciously the bit you do not understand, they arr not giving you theory. What you are being presented with is FACTS gained from over a hundred years of experimentation.

Sometimes with people like you it is better to talk in n0n technical terms, i prefer to give simple analogies so they understand despite any language barriers. So this is your analogy and the reason you will do more harm than good.

Let6s say I dip a stick in a chemical mix, i then strike that stick on a wall and it begins to burn. I goto a chemical forum and declare i have invented fire on demand, the replies all tell me that the effect i am seeing is the same as the one seen in a match! But I insist that it isnt the same, how can it be the same?? Matches are small and mine is big, matches fit in your pocket and mine dosnt. But most of all matches have RED or Black ends and mine is GREEN... Ha, see it cant be a match can it! Its too different from a match therefore it has to be new.

So then the chemistry people explain how my match works, they give me the chemical equations, they tell me of other experiments to try so i can see what is going on. But I insist this isnt needed, they are of closed mind and just talking from books. I dont need to do the experiments because its so obvious what I have is not a match.

Eventually they decide I am never going to grasp what this is, so instead they tell me to be careful. They point out what can happen in some situations, they warn i could be burnt. Well this might anger me a little, I declare all they have done is talk theory, none of them are willing to make my stick of instant fire. So these are stupid people, closed minds who only see a match, if only they could see its not a match but a instant fire stick!

So would you declare they only speak of theory??

Now to address your accusation directly.

Do Not accuse me of talking theory only, you are lying to me and yourself. Go to your first post and read it carefully, you ask for help in developing your stick of fire. In that post i spent alot of time explaining the theory and DOING some experiments for you. Others also chipped in with a great deal of information, then read my reply above.

Note the bit where i talk about debunking badly taught concepts? And the part i mention having built some of your devices as teaching aids? I have copied and used alot of your work, it has been extremely useful in demonstrating to children how even adults can be totally fooled. I used them to demonstrate the scientific method of working, i copied some of what you did exactly how you did it.

The class and I then sat and discussed it, they also thought it was magic. So the following couple of weeks I took each underlying principle and went through it with 10 years olds step by step. I introduced them to how a scientist conducts experiments, how its important to keep an open mind and be lead by the evidence of your results only. I showed them how important it was to measure with care.

After 3 weeks of doing this and building things to explore some the ideas they came up with, we sat and discussed again, we reviewed our results and reached a conclusion. So we get to the important bit, the kids learnt a large amount, they were able to see how something can look one way and yet be wrong, they were taught how to use the scientific method to get to the truth.

At no point did i say to them, look just trust me dont measure anything just believe me when i tell you this is something special going on. Dont trust the books because books are just theory.

So you come here first asking for help and a explanation (go read your first threads), you got what you asked for and this made you unhappy. Then gradually you go from asking for help to declaring we are all stupid and closed minded people who look at theory only, you sir are nothing but a dangerous, close minded fool. You will do more harm than good, i find this unacceptable and worrying. My little sister loves science and you tube, i have spent many hours explaining to her the things she sees are not always true.

You are lucky, those with sense have never considered me for a position of power here, this is good news for you. I would have banned you long ago, you have gone past being funny and into the realm of highly insulting and completely of closed mind. I would go as far as to say your a disgrace to science. I have spent time, energy and money looking into your devices, i posted my results at one point. But predictably i was told i did it on the wrong day or with the moon in the wrong place or some other complete nonsense.

I copied what you did with an open mind, my reason was not to prove if you were right or wrong. I wanted to know the RESULTS, i wanted to see the evidence for myself. I learnt just how inefficient your method is, this is useful to know, i have also used it extensively, along with your videos to warn kids of the nonsense people are allowed to put up on the internet and call science. I can except that just because it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and swims like a duck, it might not be a duck. So i then profile its DNA, at that point if the genetic results show its a duck i review my evidence.

Dosnt matter how badly i want it to be a chicken, if the evidence says its a duck....... I grab the plum sauce and cook it like a duck.

I am working on something I really believe could change the future, i am aware this is a claim that is dangerous to make. My research is being done step by step, i take great care to disprove my theory, I let the evidence lead me and not my desire to make a difference. The two projects I am working on are part funded by my business, one is looking into how to solve the PM10 exhaust problem. this research so far has gone my way, slowly i am reaching the point i need to start considering patents.

The other is even bolder, bio methane as a fuel source. What is different with my research is the organism and the concept, i have diverged from the norm in regards to bio methane reactor design, instead i am copying a concept from nature. Two years in and i still have a way to go, i want to improve what is mainly an inefficient but workable process, into an efficient one. This part I am close to finishing, already Kg for kg of starting material i can get 84% more energy out than any other system on the market. But this isnt enough, the science behind the theory tells me i should be able to get at least 400% better output than most other systems, so i know mine isnt optimized yet.

The other problem i am working on is harder, anaerobic organisms in digesters are extremely sensitive to the environment. They take a while to settle and get going, so instead i am looking at making a organism, actually i am taking yeast and fusing the plasmids from some methogenic bacteria and fusing into the nucleus. The desire is to get a easy to handle organism to make methane, so instead of giving CO2 i want yeast to give me methane.

Science tells me that methane is made from hydrogen and Carbon dioxide, so its unlikely I can get yeast to make alcohol and methane. The theory tells me this is lead into gold type thinking, actually its likely i will dump the 18 months work on yeast, my results are leading to a conclusion that it wont work. But that is ok, i will go with the evidence. I am also working on another organism, this one is showing much more promise. Its much harder to fuse plasmids into or to make a plasmid for it, which is why i had to invest in a electroporation machine, i could have heat shocked the cells, but the other way works better.

My view is alot like the Edison battery, i am young enough to be arrogant and think some things have been missed, or advances in technology mean we can revisit old technology and improve with modern techniques. This is similar to what you do, but there is a really big difference. If i make a bold claim i do the science to gather my evidence, i dont look for proof, i tend to try and stay neutral. I normally have one or two sounding boards with knowledge in the area or use places like this. When people tell me it wont work and give me reasons, i go away and investigate the ideas they have proposed.

I do not ignore people because it dosnt fit with what i believe, i use the input to make my method more robust. The reactor idea is in my mind very obvious, it would be so easy for me to just think people have completely overlooked it.

Instead I have tried to find out why the common thinking lays one way, this has encouraged me because there is a fundamental misconception on how some forms of nature make Methane. I also know by extensive literature searches that the niche i am looking at, has mainly been guided to look at a specific area. most of the methane work focuses on how to get certain organisms not to make methane or to lower the amount they make.

I want the reverse and there is little research into that area. Now lets just think a minuet, IF i did get yeast to make ethanol and produce methane efficiently (it cant actually happen BTW), then that is Nobel prize territory. It wont happen, the evidence tells me it is likely to lead to a dead end. But i need to conclude the experiment and look at all avenues before I go onto the other organism.

I have printed out my lab notes on this, pages of careful experiments and measuring. So far 4037 pages in size 8 font (trying to save paper) if i print the files out, the world is looking at different renewable solutions, in my area its wind turbines and solar. Very little money for Bio Methane research, but I do have a university lab that test some of my results. There results agree with mine, i dont work with them directly, unfortunately they would insist in making the process open source. This is a project I consider to be commercial.

So to conclude.

STOP talking utter nonsense, TEACH a single concept at a time. Show a MOTOR, show a GENERATOR and explain the function and working of these. Then by all means combine them and show this can be done, but blow the smoke away and break the mirrors. Measure on nice simple analogue gauges what each side produces/uses, analogue gauges are very good for kids, they are visual. But whatever you do dont simply combine the two things and declare its some kind of special principle. It is not special, it is confusing and it teaches NOTHING.

Why do i get so angry? I have done Drosophila genetic experiments with the school kids, on of the kids aged 12 didnt know ANYTHING about reproduction, he seriously thought Budgies in his grans cage bred by looking at themselves in the mirror! Yeah sounds funny dosnt it, well actually it didnt sound funny to me at all. That 12 year old is more than capable of getting another 12 year old pregnant, and who's fault would that of been? What would you say to that boy as he kept insisting he could not be dad because they took all the mirrors out the room?

See it really isnt funny to mislead kids, when they ask difficult questions then its a duty to answer them, if they old enough to ask then they are old enough to hear the truth.

Finally
I have so far resisted the temptation to post you tube videos, they take alot of time up and if i did do it, then it would be videos to help my business. But keep up giving out wrong info, and the moment i see youngsters buying your BS i will post videos debunking yours in every detail, i promise i will expose you as a menace to young minds. I am 17.5 (ok actually 17.7). I am sure you feel you could handle bad publicity on you tube and other places, i am sure you think you could teach me a few things in science.

Ok big shot, throw the best at me you can. I will copy your nonsense, but I will show the measurements (you know the bits you avoid). You can afford a couple of cheap meters, use them and show people the figures. Disprove your theory with real science, this means facts and figures. Love is one the few things hard to explain with a measurement (actually its not, you could measure hormone levels) but most things can be measured and proved or disproved.

 

[tcmtech]

^^^^^^^^^ Yep. What he said.

I'm pretty sure sciencetoolbar is in the same mindset as the overunity nincompoop I have been dealing with in the other section. The mindset that has now become defined worldwide as Cognitive Dissonance Projectionism and is found almost exclusively associated with, and fortunately, limited to a rather narrow band of social-poltical following mindsets that have shown themselves to have and outrageously and ever growingly bad track record of being wrong on every subject they proclaim intellectual, moral, ethical or other superiority on.

The same mindset group that feels that, somehow everyone else but them are the stupid arrogant closed minded ones, even though pretty much everyone who is not of their mindset, can and will openly and actively explain their actions and work in detail to where anyone with any basic degree of knowledge can replicate said work and confirm or disprove said findings themselves and then openly tell everyone what they found and where what was first found is likely right or wrong.

Whereas the first group won't/can't, ever yet will happily strut off as if they had made some work of god like irrefutable fact based powerpoint presentation that crushed the whole of reality as we will forever see it.

 

[cowboybob]

Facts have become an anathema to the "feelings matter" crowd, as in, "don't confuse me with the facts...".

From their simplistic view of things, the Earth sure looks flat from their porch.

 

[sciencetoolbar]

^^^^^^^^^ Yep. What he said.

I'm pretty sure sciencetoolbar is in the same mindset as the overunity nincompoop I have been dealing with in the other section. The mindset that has now become defined worldwide as Cognitive Dissonance Projectionism and is found almost exclusively associated with, and fortunately, limited to a rather narrow band of social-poltical following mindsets that have shown themselves to have and outrageously and ever growingly bad track record of being wrong on every subject they proclaim intellectual, moral, ethical or other superiority on.

The same mindset group that feels that, somehow everyone else but them are the stupid arrogant closed minded ones, even though pretty much everyone who is not of their mindset, can and will openly and actively explain their actions and work in detail to where anyone with any basic degree of knowledge can replicate said work and confirm or disprove said findings themselves and then openly tell everyone what they found and where what was first found is likely right or wrong.

Whereas the first group won't/can't, ever yet will happily strut off as if they had made some work of god like irrefutable fact based powerpoint presentation that crushed the whole of reality as we will forever see it.

))))))))))
))))))))))
))))))))))
overunity.......
))))))))))
))))))))for me is cleared we do not have the same " karma " for me you are just a" no man " and you are the only one in the world.....

 

[sciencetoolbar]

Seriously stop twisting what people say, give people more credit than you are doing.
People giving you volumes and volumes of theory??? NO, this is preciously the bit you do not understand, they arr not giving you theory. What you are being presented with is FACTS gained from over a hundred years of experimentation.

Sometimes with people like you it is better to talk in n0n technical terms, i prefer to give simple analogies so they understand despite any language barriers. So this is your analogy and the reason you will do more harm than good.

Let6s say I dip a stick in a chemical mix, i then strike that stick on a wall and it begins to burn. I goto a chemical forum and declare i have invented fire on demand, the replies all tell me that the effect i am seeing is the same as the one seen in a match! But I insist that it isnt the same, how can it be the same?? Matches are small and mine is big, matches fit in your pocket and mine dosnt. But most of all matches have RED or Black ends and mine is GREEN... Ha, see it cant be a match can it! Its too different from a match therefore it has to be new.

So then the chemistry people explain how my match works, they give me the chemical equations, they tell me of other experiments to try so i can see what is going on. But I insist this isnt needed, they are of closed mind and just talking from books. I dont need to do the experiments because its so obvious what I have is not a match.

Eventually they decide I am never going to grasp what this is, so instead they tell me to be careful. They point out what can happen in some situations, they warn i could be burnt. Well this might anger me a little, I declare all they have done is talk theory, none of them are willing to make my stick of instant fire. So these are stupid people, closed minds who only see a match, if only they could see its not a match but a instant fire stick!

So would you declare they only speak of theory??

Now to address your accusation directly.

Do Not accuse me of talking theory only, you are lying to me and yourself. Go to your first post and read it carefully, you ask for help in developing your stick of fire. In that post i spent alot of time explaining the theory and DOING some experiments for you. Others also chipped in with a great deal of information, then read my reply above.

Note the bit where i talk about debunking badly taught concepts? And the part i mention having built some of your devices as teaching aids? I have copied and used alot of your work, it has been extremely useful in demonstrating to children how even adults can be totally fooled. I used them to demonstrate the scientific method of working, i copied some of what you did exactly how you did it.

The class and I then sat and discussed it, they also thought it was magic. So the following couple of weeks I took each underlying principle and went through it with 10 years olds step by step. I introduced them to how a scientist conducts experiments, how its important to keep an open mind and be lead by the evidence of your results only. I showed them how important it was to measure with care.

After 3 weeks of doing this and building things to explore some the ideas they came up with, we sat and discussed again, we reviewed our results and reached a conclusion. So we get to the important bit, the kids learnt a large amount, they were able to see how something can look one way and yet be wrong, they were taught how to use the scientific method to get to the truth.

At no point did i say to them, look just trust me dont measure anything just believe me when i tell you this is something special going on. Dont trust the books because books are just theory.

So you come here first asking for help and a explanation (go read your first threads), you got what you asked for and this made you unhappy. Then gradually you go from asking for help to declaring we are all stupid and closed minded people who look at theory only, you sir are nothing but a dangerous, close minded fool. You will do more harm than good, i find this unacceptable and worrying. My little sister loves science and you tube, i have spent many hours explaining to her the things she sees are not always true.

You are lucky, those with sense have never considered me for a position of power here, this is good news for you. I would have banned you long ago, you have gone past being funny and into the realm of highly insulting and completely of closed mind. I would go as far as to say your a disgrace to science. I have spent time, energy and money looking into your devices, i posted my results at one point. But predictably i was told i did it on the wrong day or with the moon in the wrong place or some other complete nonsense.

I copied what you did with an open mind, my reason was not to prove if you were right or wrong. I wanted to know the RESULTS, i wanted to see the evidence for myself. I learnt just how inefficient your method is, this is useful to know, i have also used it extensively, along with your videos to warn kids of the nonsense people are allowed to put up on the internet and call science. I can except that just because it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and swims like a duck, it might not be a duck. So i then profile its DNA, at that point if the genetic results show its a duck i review my evidence.

Dosnt matter how badly i want it to be a chicken, if the evidence says its a duck....... I grab the plum sauce and cook it like a duck.

I am working on something I really believe could change the future, i am aware this is a claim that is dangerous to make. My research is being done step by step, i take great care to disprove my theory, I let the evidence lead me and not my desire to make a difference. The two projects I am working on are part funded by my business, one is looking into how to solve the PM10 exhaust problem. this research so far has gone my way, slowly i am reaching the point i need to start considering patents.

The other is even bolder, bio methane as a fuel source. What is different with my research is the organism and the concept, i have diverged from the norm in regards to bio methane reactor design, instead i am copying a concept from nature. Two years in and i still have a way to go, i want to improve what is mainly an inefficient but workable process, into an efficient one. This part I am close to finishing, already Kg for kg of starting material i can get 84% more energy out than any other system on the market. But this isnt enough, the science behind the theory tells me i should be able to get at least 400% better output than most other systems, so i know mine isnt optimized yet.

The other problem i am working on is harder, anaerobic organisms in digesters are extremely sensitive to the environment. They take a while to settle and get going, so instead i am looking at making a organism, actually i am taking yeast and fusing the plasmids from some methogenic bacteria and fusing into the nucleus. The desire is to get a easy to handle organism to make methane, so instead of giving CO2 i want yeast to give me methane.

Science tells me that methane is made from hydrogen and Carbon dioxide, so its unlikely I can get yeast to make alcohol and methane. The theory tells me this is lead into gold type thinking, actually its likely i will dump the 18 months work on yeast, my results are leading to a conclusion that it wont work. But that is ok, i will go with the evidence. I am also working on another organism, this one is showing much more promise. Its much harder to fuse plasmids into or to make a plasmid for it, which is why i had to invest in a electroporation machine, i could have heat shocked the cells, but the other way works better.

My view is alot like the Edison battery, i am young enough to be arrogant and think some things have been missed, or advances in technology mean we can revisit old technology and improve with modern techniques. This is similar to what you do, but there is a really big difference. If i make a bold claim i do the science to gather my evidence, i dont look for proof, i tend to try and stay neutral. I normally have one or two sounding boards with knowledge in the area or use places like this. When people tell me it wont work and give me reasons, i go away and investigate the ideas they have proposed.

I do not ignore people because it dosnt fit with what i believe, i use the input to make my method more robust. The reactor idea is in my mind very obvious, it would be so easy for me to just think people have completely overlooked it.

Instead I have tried to find out why the common thinking lays one way, this has encouraged me because there is a fundamental misconception on how some forms of nature make Methane. I also know by extensive literature searches that the niche i am looking at, has mainly been guided to look at a specific area. most of the methane work focuses on how to get certain organisms not to make methane or to lower the amount they make.

I want the reverse and there is little research into that area. Now lets just think a minuet, IF i did get yeast to make ethanol and produce methane efficiently (it cant actually happen BTW), then that is Nobel prize territory. It wont happen, the evidence tells me it is likely to lead to a dead end. But i need to conclude the experiment and look at all avenues before I go onto the other organism.

I have printed out my lab notes on this, pages of careful experiments and measuring. So far 4037 pages in size 8 font (trying to save paper) if i print the files out, the world is looking at different renewable solutions, in my area its wind turbines and solar. Very little money for Bio Methane research, but I do have a university lab that test some of my results. There results agree with mine, i dont work with them directly, unfortunately they would insist in making the process open source. This is a project I consider to be commercial.

So to conclude.

STOP talking utter nonsense, TEACH a single concept at a time. Show a MOTOR, show a GENERATOR and explain the function and working of these. Then by all means combine them and show this can be done, but blow the smoke away and break the mirrors. Measure on nice simple analogue gauges what each side produces/uses, analogue gauges are very good for kids, they are visual. But whatever you do dont simply combine the two things and declare its some kind of special principle. It is not special, it is confusing and it teaches NOTHING.

Why do i get so angry? I have done Drosophila genetic experiments with the school kids, on of the kids aged 12 didnt know ANYTHING about reproduction, he seriously thought Budgies in his grans cage bred by looking at themselves in the mirror! Yeah sounds funny dosnt it, well actually it didnt sound funny to me at all. That 12 year old is more than capable of getting another 12 year old pregnant, and who's fault would that of been? What would you say to that boy as he kept insisting he could not be dad because they took all the mirrors out the room?

See it really isnt funny to mislead kids, when they ask difficult questions then its a duty to answer them, if they old enough to ask then they are old enough to hear the truth.

Finally
I have so far resisted the temptation to post you tube videos, they take alot of time up and if i did do it, then it would be videos to help my business. But keep up giving out wrong info, and the moment i see youngsters buying your BS i will post videos debunking yours in every detail, i promise i will expose you as a menace to young minds. I am 17.5 (ok actually 17.7). I am sure you feel you could handle bad publicity on you tube and other places, i am sure you think you could teach me a few things in science.

Ok big shot, throw the best at me you can. I will copy your nonsense, but I will show the measurements (you know the bits you avoid). You can afford a couple of cheap meters, use them and show people the figures. Disprove your theory with real science, this means facts and figures. Love is one the few things hard to explain with a measurement (actually its not, you could measure hormone levels) but most things can be measured and proved or disproved.

hey kid! wrong again . If you wish to learn from tcm .....good luck!!!! is already written in the books.....al he knows....

 

[large_ghostman]

The earth is a good point, yes the bit you stand on is often flat. but you cant decide from that square meter of earth, the entire world is flat, you got to step back far enough to get a decent perspective. I am so sick of the amount of global problems stacking up, and the decreasing number of people able to deal with them. So training stupidity into the next generation of minds, does not make me happy.

Toolbar when i read your first couple of posts, its very clear your the student. Dont start telling me your some bright intelligent master of knowledge when you talk so much ****, dont insult my intelligence, trust me even at my age, peeing on me and trying to convince me its raining dosnt sit well.

 

[sciencetoolbar]

The earth is a good point, yes the bit you stand on is often flat. but you cant decide from that square meter of earth, the entire world is flat, you got to step back far enough to get a decent perspective. I am so sick of the amount of global problems stacking up, and the decreasing number of people able to deal with them. So training stupidity into the next generation of minds, does not make me happy.

Toolbar when i read your first couple of posts, its very clear your the student. Dont start telling me your some bright intelligent master of knowledge when you talk so much ****, dont insult my intelligence, trust me even at my age, peeing on me and trying to convince me its raining dosnt sit well.

kid you are losing the details ......important details ...look on my website on rotating magnetic field device.....and you will understand....it was a crypted mesage in the small generator......now everybody knows that except you and tcm.......

 

[large_ghostman]

hey kid! wrong again . If you wish to learn from tcm .....good luck!!!! is already written in the books.....al he knows....

Ok Grass hopper, lets have it.

Teach me, but i want facts and figures and not stupid made up words ok. If i ask a question i expect my teacher to answer with the truth. Lets settle this once and for all, your under the impression i am a student, and i am smart enough to know i will always be a student. Lets see if we can work out what you are . Fir warning to you, i would genuinely try and forget my age if i was you. Walk into this thinking i am a kid is going to get you a spanking pretty quickly.

Age and experience dosnt always outclass raw intelligence

 

[large_ghostman]

kid you are losing the details ......important details ...look on my website on rotating magnetic field device.....and you will understand....it was a crypted mesage in the small generator......now everybody knows that except you and tcm.......

Why make it cryptic? you call me a kid and yet your the one playing games .

I seen your site, again dont draw conclusions about me. Dont assume you have an advantage over me because you have more age and experience. Assume nothing about me, trust me you aint ever met someone like me.

The details you think important are the same as the end of the stick being green. important to you only, the rest of us now its simply the Oxide not the chloride (also cryptic, try working that out)

 

[sciencetoolbar]

you already choosed, to late ask tcm he is the mother of all knowledge

 

[sciencetoolbar]

Ps: I adressed wit "kid" because tcm told yoi like that and you did not react strange....

 

[tcmtech]

for me is cleared we do not have the same " karma " for me you are just a" no man " and you are the only one in the world.....

What does that even mean?

If it's an attempt to troll or insult me you clearly did it wrong.

hey kid! wrong again . If you wish to learn from tcm .....good luck!!!! is already written in the books.....al he knows....

Hardly. At this point he's got more going for him than I do and by a long shot. I know damn well he can run circles around me on chemistry (and a few other things now) and given that admission it should be pretty clear I have no problem submitting to those who show they have superior knowledge over my own.
Heck, I rather hope he turns into the next elon musk but with a better personality and more honesty in his actions!

You say you are here to teach yet you put zero effort into being anything even remotely close to coherent or scientifically factually accurate (let alone legitimately educational) on everything you present while at the same time claiming its everyone else who doesn't understand the basics. You think nobody knows that shallow fools game strategy now?

What's your excuse? Upset again and gotta resort to the troll games and personal attacks tactics because you keep getting called out for your obvious pseudoscience nonsense?

Your last thread got shut down for it so is that where you need to go here too to feel vindicated/oppressed or whatever suits your emotion victimhood narratives?

 

[DerStrom8]

This thread has run its course and has only led to arguments. I'm locking this thread for now. If the other moderators think it should be reopened then they can do that, otherwise it will stay locked.

 

[DerStrom8]

The other moderators have agreed that this thread should remain closed. Nothing good was ever going to come of it.