https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEE 55gcttqo fucking give t

>>8156804
Oh hey, that's the guy who I first heard of this shit from like 5 years ago. I'm interested in it in a number-theoretic sense, but I forgot how much of a crackpot he really is, decimal worship and math realism.

>>8156818
everyone has his flaws, noone is perfect.

only together can we materialize what bright minds can think up. Maybe some of them worked alone but almost all of them had help.

so why not put his crackpot theories under a real test at least, not just bashing.

he also posted that magnetocaloric effects make for a better freezer than gas compression, there is already a company producing it.

He may not be a dope engineer but this vortex math is very implementable.

>>8156846
Are you saying this guy was a pioneer magnetic refrigeration?

>>8156965
no but his math models temperature exchange

File: 1311626491256.jpg (56KB, 337x367px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 337x367px

>>8156804
>2/2

>>8156804
> vortex math
when I fucked his mom, my dick in her asshole looked like a vortex, does his math models that as well?

>>8158110
You hear that all day long for your mum is still fuckable.
Either she was very young (have you ever seen father ?) or you're 13 or so.

This just seems like some interesting game with sacred geometry. I don't quite see the application, OP.

File: vortex_in_vortex_out.gif (36KB, 398x376px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 398x376px

>>8158110
>>8158554
>>>/b/

>>8159116
>I don't quite see the application
he says it multiple times, coils.
as in coils which are already powering our home through induction in every single power generation machine. most coils are 1 wire spiral wound, but it they are not very efficient. he is suggesting a more symmetrical construction. the most symmetrical to be precise.

>>8160480
You must not have taken many math courses in college.

Literally all he's doing is taking multisets of numbers, splitting them into cycles, and then drawing the cycles out on a grid.

There's nothing new or interesting about presenting numbers this way.

>coils
Just because he presents numbers as some sort of cycle / geometric representation, doesn't give the numbers any significance. Under his system, numbers add,multiply,exponentiate the same way they do if you were to count normally.

He literally does not create any sort of new operator or equations, and he definitely doesn't demonstrate how the cyclical nature of his sets have anything to do with real world application.

On top of that, efficiency of inductor coils depends on the number of turns and the thickness of the wire, literally nothing else. So you're full of shit

>>8160497
>efficiency of inductor coils depends on the number of turns and the thickness of the wire, literally nothing else.

big words on a science board, prove it faggot.

>>8160497
>thickness
correct term is density btw. go back to school

>>8160525
Nah, you're wrong.

Density of steel and copper are different.

Using the same number of turns and same thickness will give similar results.
Density has nothing to do with it.

>>8156804

I watched the most important parts. his logic appears to be sound, but there is no important conclusion, just that this number pattern is unique and makes cool looking shit when you visualize it, maybe it is worth a publication

I'd like to see the 5 minute version of the video.

>>8160531
man wtf "thickness" is no absolute measurement, it uses arbitrary units.

If you look at wires of the same density, length and diameter at different temperatures, the thickness will constantly vary.

therefore thickness is the result of relative factors, but density is not. Particle count average is absolute.

>>8160774
>I'd like to see the 5 minute version of the video.
ofc you would but maybe some things just can't be explained via 5 min shorts with fancy graphics and wordplays

go watch LWT or CPG

>>8161397
>at different temperatures, the thickness will constantly vary
>but density not

>>8161397
>diameter
>thickness
Really makes you think.

>>8161401
>>8161404

thickness implies a volume, whereas diameter implies an area.

>>8161421
yes, autismo
if you increase the diameter of a wire it becomes thicker

>>8161440
I bet you're not even the anon who originaly started this so let's just get back to the threads topic.

call it what you want but there are more factors to efficient coil winding then "thickness" and number of turns. It's ridiculous to assume that stimulations of EM fields emitted by electrification of the copper wire happens everywhere instantaniously in a coil and doesn't affect it differently at different places. It's fast but not instantanious. Nothing in the world is.

VBM is supposed to be used to even out the force of EM fields generated within and around the coil.