Unipolar Induction - Relative motion isn't needed!

[gravityblock]

Any conductor moving in a magnetic field will experience charge separation and is not news, but to test for charge separation is a trick in itself. In any of my videos I do not even attempt to show this charge separation because it is extremely difficult and because it is of no use without current. So in my videos, the voltage is only registered because it has current.

What if I can show a rotating magnet does produce a current?  Look at table 3 in the below image taken from a publication titled, "Challenging Modern Physics", in chapter 9 on page 194.  Rotating the magnet and the leads at equal speeds in opposing directions (case f, ii) gives a result which is double the result of rotating the leads alone (case e).  This indicates a rotating magnet can produce a voltage with a current, contrary to your video experiment and other statements you have made.  If it didn't, then rotating the magnet in opposing directions relative to the leads would generate the same voltage and current, but this isn't the case.  Guess what, there was no tricky charge separation test necessary in order for us to clearly see that a rotating magnet does induce a voltage, and with a current in the right configurations.   I think Oliver Crane was correct in saying, "all experimenters so far have been deceived by the Monstein-Effect".

Gravock

[lumen]

Sorry, but there is nothing NEW in that chart!
My tests do not conflict with any of those results and how can they be wrong? The results you see are the results you get.

Spinning the magnet in opposition to the spinning leads is the same result as spinning either one twice as fast and only supports what I have been saying. The magnet body is one conductor and the lead is the other conductor and if you could count that makes two (2). The result is always the difference between the TWO.

I often find the same thing about Homopolar generators, someone writes a paper thinking they have discovered something special because THEY don't fully understand that the principals are exactly the same as any other generator.

I could just box up my little test rig and send it to you so you can perform all the tests yourself and finally understand.
Sorry, same stuff, different day.

[gravityblock]

I wish I did miss the boat on this, but I suspect that if "the yoke PP" were to rotate with everything else, the voltage would be gone. (can anyone say second conductor)
After all, if everything rotates, then it's the same as everything sitting still and you rotating, which we are so it should produce a voltage all the time as the earth rotates!

That brings up the basic problem of this concept. How do you check the charge in the single conductor without the testing method altering the results?

You're confusing relative motion with absolute motion.  A sting in the tail is as follows.  In mechanics, all states of uniform motion (including that of rest) are equivalent.  For any one body, it is equally true to say it is at rest or moving at any uniform velocity we choose to assume.  This indifference is expressed in Newton's first law of motion.  However, in electromagnetism, it is quite another story.  An electric charge at rest is said to be surrounded by only an electric field, but an electric charge in motion is equivalent to an electric current and is surrounded by a magnetic field.

From this, the motion in electromagnetism is not merely relative but absolute.  Einstein's theory was aimed at reconciling these two systems of kinematics and electromagnetism.  Assis et al. (1999) show that there is another complication in which there is an electric field outside a stationary conductor carrying a constant current.  This causes a problem for relativity theory because, as they say, "As regards those who consider magnets as a relativistic effect, we have shown that a resistive current carrying wire generates not only an electric field but also a magnetic field."

Gravock

[gravityblock]

Sorry, but there is nothing NEW in that chart!
My tests do not conflict with any of those results and how can they be wrong? The results you see are the results you get.

Spinning the magnet in opposition to the spinning leads is the same result as spinning either one twice as fast and only supports what I have been saying. The magnet body is one conductor and the lead is the other conductor and if you could count that makes two (2). The result is always the difference between the TWO.

I often find the same thing about Homopolar generators, someone writes a paper thinking they have discovered something special because THEY don't fully understand that the principals are exactly the same as any other generator.

I could just box up my little test rig and send it to you so you can perform all the tests yourself and finally understand.
Sorry, same stuff, different day.

I never said your individual tests conflict with any of the results in the table.  However, your overall conclusions based on each of those individual tests are wrong.  There is no current generated when spinning the magnet only (disc is stationary).  However, spinning the magnet and the disc in opposing directions will produce double the result as compared to only spinning the disc.  This indicates a spinning magnet can produce a current, which is contrary to the other experiment with only spinning the magnet.  In reply to magluvin in post #16, you said, "There is no paradox, it only appears to be because current can be generated whether the magnet spins or not, but both cases are the same thing".  This statement of yours implies a spinning magnet doesn't effect the results anymore than a what a stationary magnet does.  This is not true, as the experiment with the magnet and disc rotating in opposing directions clearly shows.

Gravock

[lumen]

Gravoc:
Ok, now I understand where you went off track here.

The chart contains information from two different types of machines, one has a disc and one does not because the disc is the structure holding the magnet and cannot be rotated separately.
In the chart, where you refer to the double output because the magnet is spinning in opposition to the lead, this in reality is when the second conductor rotates in opposition to the rotating leads.

This test was never shown in the disc generator (lower in the chart) but the results are the same.
The output is double when the disc is rotating opposite the leads, whether the magnet IS rotating or NOT again proving that the state of the magnet is irrelevant.

Like I said, the double output from opposite rotation is the same as rotating either conductor double the speed, the magnet rotation is irrelevant.
I do wish I was wrong.

Thanks for playing!