Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

[bajac]

See attached sketches (3) showing the equipment I am building. Please, keep in mind that this equipment is for Research and Development purpose (R&D). The permanent magnets are N52 neodymium, 90Lbs. I am in the process of estimating the number of turns for the #16 AWG magnet wire. Notice that the coils will be sandwiched between two 1/8" Plexiglas boards. It looks of simple construction.


Thanks.
Bajac

[hanon]

Hi Bajac,

You last drawing seems to be quite more similar to the Flynn patent that you referred in your pdf document that to your own design of the Figuera patent 30376 in that document. I attach here a screenshot of your design of Figuera´s patent included in your document. I do it so that everyone could see it graphically. I have the opinion that many people do not get into pdf attachments and they miss the information there. I agree with your design which adheres to the original Figuera design. The difference between Figuera patent and Flynn patent is that in Figuera´s device just one wire is between both electromagnets (this also happens in Hogan-Jakovlewich patent) while in Flynn´s patent the whole coil cross between the magnets. Thus, in Figuera´s device the coil is oriented perpendicular to the axis between electromagnets, while in Flynn´s device the coil is collinear with the magnets axis. This could be a big difference if we are dealing with a different type of induction, not included in current equations.

I hope this helps. Regards

PS. Antijon: you posted a gif animation some days ago. The file size is around 75 KB but when I downloaded it just is 18 KB. I think the system is reducing the file size when downloading and I can not see the animation. Could you posted as a zip file or add a external link? Thanks!!

[ovaroncito]

This design looks to me just like a "simple generator" design (conductor loop in a magnetic field).
The only difference is a magnet in the center. How will it overcome the Lorentz force to generate overunity?

[bajac]

Hannon,
Electrically speaking, the only difference between the drawing I posted, which is kind of similar to the Flynn's device, and the 1902 Figuera's device is the number of turns. Figuera shows only a single turn while the coil in my sketches has many turns. you are mistakenly referring to the inductor in Figuera's device as "one wire" when in reality is one turn (two wires connected in series.)
Notice the following:
1.    Each of the two conductors for each turn in the coils shown in my sketches cut the two magnetic fields simultaneously at right angles, so is Figuera's. You will conclude that the angle is 90 degrees, if you draw the vector tangential velocity and the vector magnetic field, which is the same condition as in the Figuera's device. And,
2.    The voltage induced in each conductor of a turn (you call wire) adds up, so is Figuera's.
The big questions here are,
a.    Did Figuera refer to a single conductor for the sake of simplicity? Or,
b.    Is a single turn bieing shown in order to minimize the air gap as a way to maximize the applied magnetic field?
c.    Or, is a single turn configuration the key for this device to have over unity?
In accordance with the analysis in the paper I posted last week, a single turn configuration should not be the key for over unity. That is why the testing of the device in my sketches is so important to answer the above questions.
Thanks,
Bajac

[bajac]

I just added more details to the sketches. See attached document.