What would be the benefits if a no back emf motor really exist?

[kfede224]

If anyone has a real no back emf motor, the trick to get overunity could be build a circuit in wich there were some no back emf motors in series. You could play with coils resistance to get a certain value always, no matter how many motors you put in series. You can have a generator circuit for each of no back emf motors.

Just an idea.   

[MasterPlaster]

Here is one:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11885-my-asymmetric-electrodynamic-machines-46.html

[kfede224]

If anyone has a real no back emf motor, the trick to get overunity could be build a circuit in wich there were some no back emf motors in series. You could play with coils resistance to get a certain value always, no matter how many motors you put in series. You can have a generator circuit for each of no back emf motors.

Just an idea.   

Mine was a super big IF. In my opinion, most motors are proven to present back emf in a way that COP is lower than 1. If a motor were zero back emf, it would destroy in the very near time after running, because it would reach an infinite velocity.

I have trouble understanding pulse motors. Is there a way to capture some back emf in a way that, instead of counteract applied electricity, it can be absorbed by the stator circuit?. I haven't found an explanation of these motors based on physics math. That's the big problem, these motors become very difficult to understand based on a theoretical point of view.


At the time I'm writing this, I have looked into this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buCo8R4XZLE

[kfede224]

I have a killing thought experiment for physicists and thermodynamicists and the like. Those who are always looking for 2+2=4 but for some reason avoid certain issues that are very clear.

Simply put the picture where we have an object of mass m in the ground. The physics math show that we have zero gravitational potential energy there. We need to do work in order to gain potential energy. This work is meant to have a negative sign. Then when the object falls, it does a positive work because kinetic energy, and then we have the plus work minus negative work equal zero..... Ok, enough garbage. Now look into reality.... If the object breaks at the time it reach ground, where do we add that energy, the internal energy (energy of deformation?), in the 'perfect' thermodynamic cycle?? And what if instead of the object being a simple rock, it is some mechanism composed of magnet, solenoid, and a spring..... Obviously when such a mechanism hit ground after falling, it presents an electric current for the very basic reason of mechanical vibration and electromagnetic induction.

[Low-Q]

If anyone has a real no back emf motor, the trick to get overunity could be build a circuit in wich there were some no back emf motors in series. You could play with coils resistance to get a certain value always, no matter how many motors you put in series. You can have a generator circuit for each of no back emf motors.

Just an idea.   

That motor would be a motor with no input energy neccessary to run, and accelerate. No back emf is, as far as I understand, the key to over unity. Because the back emf is depending on the supply and vica versa. If you put energy into something that does not tell the generator how much energy there is spent, the generator will believe it does not deliver energy at all.


No back emf would be pretty ugly after a few seconds of run due to the infinite capacity to deliver energy. If not loaded, the device would spin up until it explodes.


Vidar