V Gate Magnetic Config

[minnie]

Hi Jdneilson,
               I've just read the Koala's comments and all of what he says seems true to me.
Koala puts in a lot of effort to try and help the likes of you. If you take into consideration
what he's pointed out it save you a lot of wasted time. Rubbish in, enhanced rubbish
out!
     John.

[MileHigh]

Jdneilson:

Please read the thread "Building a self looping "SMOT."

There you will find a discussion about magnetic potential energy, kinetic energy, gravitational potential energy, and magnetic potential energy wells.  That is the real language that describes the energy dynamics of a system like the one you are proposing to build.  If you absorb that information you may want to rethink your whole system.

MileHigh

[TinselKoala]

TinselKoala, It would appear that you too have a talent, The ability to pick and ridicule anyone on here that has an idea, judging from your replies to other posts you seem to have the ability and will to deter anyone from even attempting to create such devices, maybe you should seek employment with the nearest petro-chemical plant or energy supplier.  You evidently have a calling

Thanks to all the other people for suggestions and pointing me in the right direction.

And, like others of your ilk, you would rather insult me than do your own experimentation. Recall that you are asking for help, you have tried to get someone to examine your design and to build a prototype, which would take lots of money, time, knowledge, tooling and skills --- knowledge and skills which you clearly do not possess yourself. It is much MUCH more difficult and time-consuming to work with actual materials than it is to draw pretty pictures in a CAD package. I have already given you, freely, the equivalent of hundreds of dollars worth of consultation time and thought, and you repay me with scorn and insult. That tells me a lot about YOU and your "calling".

Go on, get yourself some magnets, get off your ass, and do something ON YOUR OWN. When you have a real device that shows ANY of the things your idea depends upon, like "shielding", endwise levitation/suspension without any contact, or energy gain from even a single gate... or the influence of static electricity on magnets or vice-versa.... then you may EARN some credibility. But with this post you have proven yourself to be yet another blowhard sitzenpizzler who would rather insult those with real experience than do his own work.

Your claim about me is also plainly wrong, since I ALWAYS encourage people to DO THEIR OWN WORK PROPERLY and produce REAL DATA in support of their claims. I have given YOU YOURSELF a suggestion to try that you could do in an afternoon, if you had opposeable thumbs and could actually wield a tool. But evidently you cannot. I have nothing but contempt for people like you, who cannot do things on their own but insult those who can.

[TinselKoala]

I've been thinking about this and I have more to say. Read it and consider it, or not: that is up to you.

You have asked for help in your project. Fine. I will stay completely away from the sound physical "theoretical" principles that prevent your idea from working and I will discuss only practical, empirical situations.

Your project was inspired, apparently, by the Calloway V-gate, which has never worked for anyone who has tried it, and as "evidence" you referred to roobert's famous faked device, which most of us know is "working" due to the injection of outside power somewhere. I can think of five or six ways to do it without even straining. Roobert himself said he used an electromagnet "under his shirt" but I can think of better ways. Nobody, nowhere, no how, not Calloway or anyone else has ever shown a _real_ gain from the Calloway arrangement of magnets (or any other, by the way).  Please correct me if I am wrong in any of this: that is how a rational discussion proceeds.

Take a look here (or anywhere else) and see if you can find any genuine evidence of a Calloway V-gate working without adding energy by hand or machine.
http://callowayengines.com/

Your design depends on several things. Bismuth, shielding, endwise levitation without contact, and you have referred to "static" interacting with permanent magnets.
You believed at first that the diamagnetic metal Bismuth would somehow shield magnetic fields. Other people corrected you on this before I had a chance to. Your belief told me that your claim to "understand magnetic fields" or magnetism, however you put it... was in error.  I immediately thought of the Dunning-Kruger effect. The only thing that can "shield" a magnetic field without itself being strongly attracted to the source of the field is a superconductor, and then you actually find your magnet "pinned" by its field to the superconductor, which is even worse than simply being attracted to it. Mu-metal, which is specifically formulated, worked, and sold for magnetic and electromagnetic shielding.... is very strongly attracted by a magnet, and it is this fact of strong attraction that prevents "shielding" from helping a permanent magnet motor to work. Please correct me, with checkable and credible references, if you think any of this is incorrect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRby1Wilv-Q

The suspension of your rotor shaft inside your apparatus depends on radially-acting magnetic bearings, a known technology that all of us here are familiar with, because we remember Steorn. However, it also depends on longitudinal, or end-wise, levitation or suspension without physical contact. Earnshaw's Theorem explains why this cannot work stably. Even the use by Steorn of the same radial bearing system you describe, required the use of one point of contact at one end of the shaft to work stably. In stark contrast to your claim about me that I discourage experimentation, I described to you a simple experiment that you could try yourself: attempt to construct the basic bearing system that you have described, with end-wise levitation of a shaft using repelling magnets. (It's funny that people seem intuitively to understand that an _attractive_ endwise system cannot work, isn't it? But the situation is symmetrical. You can no more stably "hang" a shaft with attractive pairs on both ends, than you can "squeeze" it with repulsive pairs on both ends.)
You can order the ring and button magnets from the internet and have them at your door in four days. You can get a dowel and glue at the hardware store and craft sticks at WalMart or your local hobby shop. Some nylon nuts and bolts from the hardware or hobby store. Thirty dollars maximum for everything, and then you can experiment to your heart's content, and if you manage stable non-contact endwise levitation... like I said, let me know right away, because that would be a _significant result_. Just how significant I will leave to your imagination. The interaction between your hoped-for endwise suspension system and your magnetic clutch idea to transfer power through the walls of your vacuum chamber introduces yet another interaction that works against stability in both the axial and radial directions.

Again, if I am wrong in any of this, please correct me, and it would help if you could provide something other than opinion or simulation.

http://vimeo.com/10042235

Does anyone think CLaNZeR would not use full endwise levitation, if it were possible at all?

Finally, the issue of static and permanent magnets / bearings. At first I wasn't sure but you have convinced me you are indeed talking about electrostatic charges and the electric field from them. I showed you a video of a device of mine that uses strong electric fields, ion spray to transfer electrostatic charges and produces very fast rotation, and it uses a magnetic bearing system that is essentially the same as what you proposed, of course without the forbidden endwise levitation. (It's horizontal and uses only "half" of a fully radial magnetic suspension like you used horizontally and Steorn used vertically but the operating principle is exactly the same. Anyone who has worked with the Mendocino suspension, or a fully radial Steorn suspension, knows how precisely the end-play must be adjusted and maintained. Steorn even used a micrometer head readable in the hundredth of a millimeter to make their adjustments for optimal stability.) This system is not affected by any interaction that might be there, between the electrostatic elements, the surfaces, the cathode and anode structures, the charges and fields they produce, and the magnetic elements, the magnets and the fields from them. The two systems are totally independently acting, one does not influence the other in any way that I can detect. I have worked with that system and other electrostatic systems for a long time. A very long time. I asked you -- politely I thought -- to keep looking for the reference that was the source of your belief.
Electricity and electrostatic fields can and do interact negatively with _contact_ metal bearings, like journal, ball-race, roller-race bearings or even simple brass bushings with metal shafts running in them. Such bearings can be irreparably damaged by conducting, eg, lightning strikes or even lesser static discharges... and the reason for this should be obvious to anyone who has ever done any welding. Also, there are other effects that can make certain material combinations in bearings into electrostatic generators themselves.  But your design has no contact bearings. If some of your internal structures were made of a non-conducting material then rotating them past each other might generate some charge separation... but then there's that pesky vacuum. As I hope we now know, it takes a _hard_ vacuum to properly insulate high voltages.
Once more, if you care to challenge any of this, please do so, with a reasoned argument and including references to demonstrations of your own, or other credible outside resources.

I've already posted a link to my electrostatic Mendocino motor. There are many other videos on my channel dealing with electrostatics, and also with high voltages in a vacuum chamber. Some of these also involve magnets.

I have indeed tried to get creative and intelligent people _like yourself_ to stop wasting time on long-disproven systems that have neither empirical nor theoretical support, and I've tried to provide information -- from demonstrations and/or checkable outside references -- to help them understand what they are doing, and in some cases to do it a lot better. I've also helped several experimenters by "replicating" their work and checking their results and I've even given some very basic help to people who have been trying to build something or the other, like Bedini motors, Tesla coils, Joule Thiefs, electrostatic machines and etc. My YouTube channel has over 500 videos now on various topics, most of them with some kind of "free energy" connection somehow. You can think what you like about me, I don't really care much any more, but you should at least get your facts straight if you are going to make claims or insinuations about me.

Let's hope that's all I have to say in the matter.

[Jdneilson]

I would like to take a moment to apologize, been a victim to numerous trolls on the net my first thoughts were "her we go again".  I jumped the gun and for which i'm sorry.  After reading your last post I realize that you were actually trying to steer me in the right direction. 

I knew the theory behind bismuth, but as for the strength of the diamagnetic properties I now realize it would be pointless as a shield.

The statement about the static I read somewhere on the net, can't find it and was evidently wrong anyway.

The idea of a multi cylinder design comes from the various vgate vids on youtube which seem to be stuck on the idea of the stator magnets on the outside and some mechanical way of moving the stator magnets.

I then started looking at ways to influence the the magnetic strength of the stator magnets as they passed over on to the next gate.

I then started to look at gauss readings across magnets, www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp‎

There seems to be a sliding scale, The most outer of a bar magnet is obviously the strongest point of attraction, My design has the magnets of the vgate ofset by 0.5mm and a total of 12 magnets, thats 6mm of movement down the bar magnet.

The total attraction of 3 magnets interacting at 0.5,1.0,1.5,2.0  ....  5.5mm far exceeds the attraction of 3 magnets at 0.0mm

I was wondering what way would be most effective?  Having an iron disk as shown or 2 columns of magnets down either side in effect turning the stator into a horse shoe, moving the poles away to the center of the shaft and creating a neutral stator magnet to pass over to the next gate.

regarding the idea of the shaft, I saw a youtube vid of a magnet rod being suspended via 2 ring magnets, he had one end fixed using a metal ball pushing on another metal ball and the other end was by repelling magnets.  the friction of the 2 round balls wold be very minimal, or would you not trust the vid?  like I say, I only have the internet as a source of inspiration.  without the background in this field its hard to say what to trust. 

What software would you recommend using for visualizing field lines, or just get some ferrofluid or something similar? 

Sorry for jumping the gun, I now realise that you know your field of work and that you have a lot to offer.
I hope you accept my apology.