Unipolar Induction - Relative motion isn't needed!

[gravityblock]

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!

Lumen,

I never disagreed with you on opposite rotation being the same as rotating either conductor at double the speed.  Our disagreement is on the rotation of the magnet being irrelevant.  In table 3 which I previously posted, I did miss the fact that tests d, e, and f were with a conductive magnet while the other tests were not.  However, this doesn't change the fact that the rotation of the magnet is relevant and can produce a voltage/current.  I would like to now draw your attention to test d, which gives a result.  In case (d), the standard explanation of this phenomenon has been that the conductive magnet cut it's own lines as it rotates (field remains stationary as the conductive magnet rotates).  The following explanation is now being proposed due to being able to carry out more detailed experiments on the Faraday generator by using the configuration as shown in Figure 41 below.  In case (d), spinning the conductive magnet generates a voltage in the lead from the rim of the magnet to the galvanometer (A-G) because the rotating lines cut that lead mainly once, as in figure 41.  In case (b), where the non-conductive magnet only rotates, then there is no result because the rotating lines of the magnet cut the circuit twice.  Again, the rotation of the magnet is relevant in the correct configurations where the rotating field doesn't cut the whole circuit twice in the same direction.  If we look at case (c) and assume the field doesn't rotate with the magnet, then the stationary field would cut the circuit twice giving a no result.  If we assume the field does rotate with the magnet, then the rotating field doesn't cut any part of the circuit because the whole circuit is also rotating with the field (no relative motion between the field and the circuit).  While Faraday commented that the conductor crossed the lines once in case (d), he did not consider this important distinction in his other tests (this is where you went off track).  If we can measure a lack of back torque from homopolar generators, then for the first time in history, we will be able to distinguish a rotating magnetic field from a non-rotating one.

Thanks for playing and game over (check-mate)!

Gravock   

[gravityblock]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njWwyynLrdo&feature=uploademail

I've been proposing this for a long time.  If we combined the magnet configuration in the above video with a similar configuration as found in figure 41 where the rotating field of a rotating magnet only cuts the circuit once, then we could extract the current from both sides of the magnets at the shaft with slip rings (actually the circuit on each side of the magnet configuration will each be cut once, but with an effect as if the circuit were cut twice in opposing directions, generating twice the voltage without having to double the speed). This particular magnet configuration rotating together in the same direction would be similar in splitting a magnet in half at it's poles, then rotating it's north pole side in opposition to it's south pole side and extracting the current from both sides of the magnets with slip rings at the shaft.  I think this type of magnet configuration with a multi-frame homopolar generator will work with no back torque, because we will then be able to distinguish a rotating magnetic field from a non-rotating one.

Gravock

[lumen]

Gravoc:
Fig. 41 is EXACTLY the same as a normal Faraday disc generator, YOU just fail to see the magnet is also working as the disc!
So you see it really is game over, just nobody wins!

[gravityblock]

Gravoc:
Fig. 41 is EXACTLY the same as a normal Faraday disc generator, YOU just fail to see the magnet is also working as the disc!
So you see it really is game over, just nobody wins!

Fig. 41 is not the same as a conventional Faraday disc generator, and you fail to see how the leads have been repositioned so the rotating field only cuts the circuit once, instead of twice as in the traditional Faraday generator, and by using two slip rings at the shaft to accomplish this.  I do see how the conductive magnet is the same as having a conductive disc glued to a non-conducting magnet and rotating with it (this is very elementary and isn't anything which I was unaware of).  I only missed the fact that some of the tests in table 3 used a conductive magnet and some of the tests used a non-conductive magnet with a detached conductive disc, but this in no way changes the fact that the rotation of the magnet is relevant, as I showed in my previous post.  The circuit (B-A) of the conductive rotating magnet (or a disc glued to the magnet) isn't being cut by the rotating field lines, so the circuit partially internal to the magnet (B-A) is only acting as a return path and isn't the portion of the circuit which is responsible for generating the voltage/current.  The portion of the circuit which is being cut only once by the rotating field lines is the stationary portions of the circuit (A-G) which is responsible for the induction and not (B-A) or a disc if it were attached to the magnet.  I guess the game is over for those who continuously miss the boat.

Gravock

[lumen]

The lead from point "A" can make any stright line path away from the magnet and still cut the field lines only once.
Just draw all the field lines from the N to the S face and you will see this.
The fact remains there is one stationary conductor and one rotating conductor.