Now I have no choice but to intervene in this matter as OT Royal Scientist. I have read both dissertations and while johnmedina999's proof in Coldtooth's inability to relate magnets to traps holds up, johnmedina999 misinterpreted the results of Coldtooth's experiment.
First, it is impossible to cloak a charge unless there is something to a) redirect it, or b) cancel it out. Coldtooth clearly states the experimental procedure is to change positive attraction to negative attraction by infusing it with a negative attraction from a sample of another negative attraction. The results of such must be clear: Infuse enough of the negatively attracted sample, and it overwhelms the positive attraction. This is strictly confirmed by the Coldtooth's description of the resultant product, "still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive." Therefore, there is no cloaking occurring. This results in the other two options, which happen to be both correct: Magnet A's positive charge is revealed, and one or both Magnets are still attracted to each other. How this is possible is a matter of an ancient principle the Greeks first postulated.
Second, you interpret the added sample not to be a part of Magnet A. A modular component which part of a bigger object it fits to is by no means the object itself, however, consider Coldtooth's resultant product due to the procedure adding the sample to Magnet A. Coldtooth states, 'It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction." It is no longer something that can be taken apart. Yes, you may be able to identify the sections in which there is a positive charge and a negative charge, but by no means are these sections separate object anymore as they are bound to one another. Question whether Magnet A's inherited sample constitutes as the same object you may as much as wish, but in that case consult Theseus's paradox.
If Coldtooth successfully demonstrates the relationship between magnets and traps, the results must be interpreted as the following: "Traps inherit the 'gayness' from a subject of the opposite gender by making it part of themselves".
First, it is impossible to cloak a charge unless there is something to a) redirect it, or b) cancel it out. Coldtooth clearly states the experimental procedure is to change positive attraction to negative attraction by infusing it with a negative attraction from a sample of another negative attraction. The results of such must be clear: Infuse enough of the negatively attracted sample, and it overwhelms the positive attraction. This is strictly confirmed by the Coldtooth's description of the resultant product, "still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive." Therefore, there is no cloaking occurring. This results in the other two options, which happen to be both correct: Magnet A's positive charge is revealed, and one or both Magnets are still attracted to each other. How this is possible is a matter of an ancient principle the Greeks first postulated.
Second, you interpret the added sample not to be a part of Magnet A. A modular component which part of a bigger object it fits to is by no means the object itself, however, consider Coldtooth's resultant product due to the procedure adding the sample to Magnet A. Coldtooth states, 'It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction." It is no longer something that can be taken apart. Yes, you may be able to identify the sections in which there is a positive charge and a negative charge, but by no means are these sections separate object anymore as they are bound to one another. Question whether Magnet A's inherited sample constitutes as the same object you may as much as wish, but in that case consult Theseus's paradox.
If Coldtooth successfully demonstrates the relationship between magnets and traps, the results must be interpreted as the following: "Traps inherit the 'gayness' from a subject of the opposite gender by making it part of themselves".