Where's my Story? [CLOSED]

[valterra]

Anybody have problems with Journal / Diary entries not showing up?

I hope I'm not getting them deleted on me.  That's just wrong.

Some time ago, I saw a reference to that wireless power transfer stuff being demonstrated at CNET or one of those big computer and electronic shows.  Then just recently, I saw that HowStuffWorks has an article about some MIT guys doing it...  but my posts aren't there any more.

I made some cracks about that over-unity stuff or conspiracy theorists out there - but it should have been very clear that I don't believe in any of that garbage.

So what gives?  Are my stories just disappearing, or is some admin a little too fast with that ole delete button?

The latter would make me sad - especially since I'm one of the "do-ers" on the board, carving my own blades and proudly flying on windy days.  And I am only about as nutty as everyone else who hangs around this place.  :-)

The decision was made. Accept it or not, but don't try to rehash it here. This is exactly why "explaining" decisions is not a good idea. CLOSED.

[kurt]

i removed that story in keeping with board policy you don't like it take it up with Admin maybe he will reverse my decision. wouldn't be the first time probably won't be the last....  you can find a link to Admin's email address at the very bottom of most pages on the board.

[DanB]

Sorry Valterra   - I have to back Kurt up on this one for sure.  The board is focused (hopefully) on more practical stuff than that, and hopefully more focus on projects than ideas.  'Tesla' brings up a big red flag for me and this wireless power transfer stuff is not practical or efficient (or else folks would be doing it by now I expect).  

There are better places to discuss that stuff...

Hope you understand!

[finnsawyer]

I agree with you.  In fact, I posted a comment to your posting.  You can find it with my comments.  I feel in this case Admins attitude is rather harsh.  In fact the ability of experimenters to send a "spark" through the air way back when is what got us where we are today.  They say it doesn't belong here.  Well, wouldn't it be nice to be able to send power from the wind turbine to the battery shack through the air without wires?  I'd also like to mention that the ability to resonate with and pick energy from a certain low frequency E-M wave may actually make some of those overunity designs appear to work until they are put in a Faraday Cage.  Considering it was a Diary I think Kurt should have left your post alone policies or no policies.  

[tecker]

It's not that big a deal It's just radio with out the carrier . I looked at the MIT thing they put up they didn't say how much power went in on the transmitter side I'll bet there were losses. It really isn't practical aplications .Maybe soon Megaherts Pwm and some resonate coils.Maybe .It's otherpower's bandwidth they want to keep it real.I'm down with that.  

[dbcollen]

If everyone started transmitting high power wirelessly we would all get cooked, there is much discussion as to the effects of cordless phones and cellphones EMF causing health problems, if that 1/4 watt is harmfull, imagine what KW, MW, Or Gigawatts would do.

Dustin

[valterra]

I wasn't trying to explore some fantasy idea that nobody's tried.  And if Kurt paid any attention to my post, he would have seen that I had SPECIFICALLY questioned how (in)efficient something like this is.  I mean, we all fret about voltage loss in copper, and this would obviously be more lossy than that.

DanB, I appreciate your explanation.  Simply saying, "Yeah, I deleted it, and if you have a problem, here's where you can go..." simply is rude considering that I'm not one of the guys on the board who's posted anything out of line with the type of work we're trying to do here.

I have to call into question the judgment of practicality.  As a radio guy, I've seen people almost railroaded off of computer geek message boards because they said wireless "cluster" networks don't work, because wireless networking is completely impractical (too slow).  Then, as technology advances, and wireless speed increases, you see all kinds of "hackers" using WiFi all over the place.

I'll never come on here claiming to have built (or believing that someone has) built a perpetual motion machine or any crap like that.

But if one day, they figure out how to use radio waves or something to transmit power, we'd all gain from that.

I mean, why aren't I getting laughed off the board for leaving a bunch of diodes out in the sun, or for sticking a bent piece of wood on an electric motor?  

This post was written on a battery powered computer and transmitted over the radio to another computer, which is hooked up to a mess of copper down at the phone company.

I place a call on my cell phone, which is a two-way radio.  It beams electrons to a tower several miles away.  That tower converts the signal and sends it via copper wire through the local telephone system, which routes it back to the same tower.  That tower then transmits the signal to my wife's cell phone, which is in the car in front of me on the Interstate.  

I could have used a walkie-talkie.  THAT would have been "practical."

But Dan, I DO see your point.  If I were you, I wouldn't want anyone responding to my post with stuff like, "Don't make fun of me!  We never really DID go to the Moon!"  and "Tesla was working on an anti-gravity machine!!"  or "Art Bell retired, you a-hole!!!"        :-)      I see that even though I didn't say I believed in any wacky stuff, maybe my post would have invited some people who did.  :-)

Okay?  So I got that, but just send me a line next time.  And remember that I'm one of the "good guys" on here.  That's all I'm saying.

[valterra]

That's what I'm saying!  I mean, we seem to sometimes walk a very fine line between not wanting any new technology and not wanting to be old fashioned.

I LOVE THIS BOARD because of the whole "Cutting edge of LOW technology" thing.  RE makes my think of a simpler life.... BUT... we ARE using resistors and diodes and capacitors and batteries and meters and computers... so we're not really THAT low tech, are we?

[valterra]

And to be clear again - there was no discussion of anything that even purports to even "bend" the laws of physics.  And I DID question the efficiency!

I respect Dan's philosophy of focusing on PROJECTS rather than IDEAS.  That makes sense, so I submit to his ruling.  But just courtesy, like I mentioned below.  That's all.  :-)  Dan and the gang have been very nice to me "behind the scenes," so I was a little surprised at kurt's curt (hee hee) remarks.

[kurt]

your lucky you got a response at all i could have just nuked this diary and everything you posted after that till you stopped talking about it and that would have been standard operating procedure if you did not have a long standing posting history...... long drawn out explanations are pointless because the more you explain the more people argue as you are proving....

[valterra]

I'll go along because I know it's their bandwidth, too.  

But I just didn't understand some things.  For example, people have suggested that I put a webcam on my genny.  I figured I'd try to put up a wireless one, so I wouldn't have to get everything tangled up with wires.  Also, I've been looking all over for someone who's put something wireless up on theirs.  You know, like a small device that collects stats like voltage, rpm, etc., and transmits it to a receiver that is hooked up to their computer.  Or a commercial one would likely have its own receiver that looks like one of those home weather stations.  I can't see that anyone has thought of that.  Is that not energy conscious enough?  I actually DID find a company that makes them, but they are very expensive.  I figured one of the smart guys on here would have thought of doing it themselves, cheaper.

If any of us went to another guy's place, and he had a wireless transmitter that sent the stats to his house, or better yet, acted like a node on his WiFi network, we'd all be oooing and awwwing about it.  I don't think we'd be telling him how impractical it is.  AND if he had it all rigged up so that there were no wires, the first thing most of us guys would be saying is, "Wow, I'm sure my WIFE would really like me to do it THIS way!"  :-)   C'mon, guys.  Let's be honest here - efficient or not.

Ultimately I do seen DanB's point.  If I was actually working on a project like that, maybe my post wouldn't have been deleted?  That does make more sense.  There are a LOT of so-called good ideas out there.  But I thought I had done enough research to verify that this was a legitimate project before I posted it.  Those MIT guys are doing all kinds of neat stuff, after all.  

[valterra]

"and that would have been standard operating procedure if you did not have a long standing posting history"

That's my point, Kurt.  :-)   I'm not mad.  And I've seen the posts where someone gets on here saying that TomW or whoever is an a-hole because he did or didn't do this or that or that "The Dans" are censoring their great ideas that have already been disproved over and over again.  :-)   I've been here long enough for you to know that I'm not one of "those" guys.  

Smiling here.  Need to take this down a notch.  

This damned internet really sucks for some discussions.  People that know me know that I don't ask rhetorical questions.  If I say that "I wonder why..." then it really is because I wonder why.  So if you guys read back through what I wrote here, realizing that I do NOT write with a shrill tone, you'd see that I'm quite reasonable.

Or I'm crazy.  After all, I have a wall covered with wires, a frickin' airplane propeller on the roof, solar panels sitting in the back yard, wires and components all over the place...  I always tell people that this stuff can get very "mad scientisty."  You're in the UK.  I don't have to tell you what "mad" means!  :-)