Transrapid, train of future (correct me please)

So, I have to give a presentation on the Transrapid, a magnetic levitation train and I have to do a summary in English too. Could you say me if it is correct?

Quote:

---

Transrapid: summary

The Transrapid is a train known as “Magnetic Levitation Train”. In fact this train travels without touching the rails because it is carried along by the strength of the magnets. So the frictions with the rails which prevents the classic trains from going faster, disappear. Without the frictions, the transrapid needs less energy than a classic train, and it can attain 460km/h.

The contrary poles always attract themselves and the similar poles repulse themselves. The magnetic levitation train works thanks to this system.
On every side of the train, some magnets are placed in line. Those magnets are placed alternately, so the poles are south, north, south, north, etc… On the rails, it’s the same but with electromagnets.
We have seen that two similar magnets repulse themselves and two contrary magnets attract themselves. When the electromagnets are powered, they have the same properties as magnets. According to its place on the rail, it stays on the premises or it advances of one place for being in equilibrium as much as possible. When the train has moved over one magnet, we reverse the current which crosses the electromagnets of the rails and so the polarisation is inverted. The train continue to advance. And this operation, repeated thousands of times, allows the train to advance thanks to magnetic levitation.

With the advantages this train has, we may predict a bright future, but will safety win out against cost?

---

it is carried by the magnets’ strength- carried along by the strength of the magnets
So the frictions with the rails- firction (and change the verb to disappears)

OPPOSITE poles always attract themselves and the similar poles repulse themselves.
The magnetic levitation train works thanks to this system.
On every side of the train, some magnets are placed in LINE. Those magnets are placed alternately, so the poles are south, north, south, north, etc…
On the rails, it’s the same but with electromagnets.

Don't use single line paragraphs- these are connected and should be incorprated.

repulse themselves- each other
they get the same properties which magnets have- they have the same properties as magnets

it stays on the premises or it advances of one place for being in equilibrium as much as possible

This doesn't make much sense:
it either stays in place or it moves on one place (I don't understand the in equilibrium part)

When the train will have advanced of one magnet
When the train has moved over one magnet

the magnetic levitation- delete 'the'

The advantages which this new kind of train gets, let predict a beautiful future.
But will the safety may win against the cost?

With the advantages this train has, we may predict a bright future, but will safety win out against cost?

Thanks fot this correction, but one thing:

Quote:

---

OPPOSITE poles always attract themselves and the similar poles repulse themselves.

---

Actually, I have used "opposed" past participle because the poles are contrary and it's why they repulse themselves. But as it isn't very apparent, I've changed in "contrary".

Thanks still :-D

I suggested 'opposite' because they are direct opposites- positive/negative. :fadein:

Hi,

Sorry for butting in but I just couldn't help because I'm curious about one thing.

By replacing 'repluse themselves' to 'repel each other', what kind of difference, no matter how small, will it give to the sentence? I mean the meaning remains the same but would you feel any different?

I'm asking, first because 'repel each other' just sounds better and more right to my ears (although I know both are correct), and I was wondering if it's just me. Another reason is I'm trying to sense any subtle differences between similar sentences so I know when to use certain words in the most approperiate manner and situation.

Thanks in advance, and I apologize again, for butting in.

To be honest- repel sound better to me. ;-)

It sounds better but doesn't make exactly the same sense.
Repel means "be turned off by", but magnets don't have feelings and can't like or dislike another magnet ^^. Maybe I don't understant exactly the sense of "repulse"... then perhaps it's better to say: "push themselves back" ?

Depending on context, they can both carry the turn-off sense. Google gives 43,300 for magnets + repel and 525 for magnets + repulse, so it would appear that repel is more common. ;-)

Yes like I said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by me

Repel means "be turned off by", but magnets don't have feelings and can't like or dislike another magnet ^^

---

I've searched the meaning of "repulse" and it's doesn't mean what I wanted.
Then, I've changed "repulse" by "push back" and so we can better understand that the magnets push back themselves not because they are repelled because of their feelings, but because it's physical.

An for results in Google, the research with "magnets+push+back" gives 179 000 results ^^

However, thanks for your corrections and comments. :-D