Gyroscopic Particles (how they work)

[verpies]

1. What are those gyroscopic particles ? Electrons ? Don't think so. Ether ?

Not electrons, but electrons can channel and deflect these gyroscopic particles . Protons can channel (a through motion) them even more.
IMO opinion these particles are just units of rotating 3D space/time. (not 3D space & 1D time) and because of this, they are confused with an all pervading Aether.
Stacking spins onto these gyroscopic particles, makes electrons or positrons out of them. Adding more spins makes muons and adding more spins makes protons out of them...

2. Where are they ? Where are they coming from ?

Since they are the mere relation between units of space and time (a definition of motion), they are everywhere and all matter is made out of them. Microscopically all motion moves at c, it is only when it is looped (by spinning) then it may appear as arrested motion in 1, 2 or 3 dimensions of space or time,  but only when averaged over 2 or more units.

3. Do they push electrons ?

Yes and they also push protons, positrons, muons, etc... by mechanical bombardment.

Are they the motive force for electric current ?

They are the electric current ...when directionalized linearly.
Just because they also push electrons outside of conductors, does not mean that electric current inside solid conductors consists of moving electrons.

Synchronicity:  I just wrote more about this subject here.

4. The nature of jerk process. The magnetic field impulse is coming from where ? From electrons ? from gyroscopic particles ?

That I do not understand, but maybe this experiment is related to it.  Also see this.

[wings]

Spin waves
http://web.archive.org/web/20041020060022/http:/www.vasantcorporation.com/
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=368

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VDEtPGB13NM&list=PLz0hV4NkTSsNwh5GwsQFz55E587Talkyd

[kmarinas86]

It turns out that a current may produce a magnetic field different than would be implied by the velocity of their charges alone. Charges not only have velocity, but also acceleration and jerk, which is equal to a change of acceleration per change in time.

The velocity of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.
The acceleration of the charge contributes to its non-conservative electric field.
The jerk of the charge contributes to the magnetic field.

It is a fact of Maxwell's equations that a changing magnetic field produces a non-conservative electric field. The voltage [V] corresponding to the non-conservative electric field [V/m] is in fact the counter-emf. In turn, a changing non-conservative electric field produces a magnetic field, of the opposite polarity.

If the jerk of the electrons is sufficiently high, a magnetic field surrounding the wire can be generated whose strength is much greater than is explicable by the current. To cause the electrons to jerk sufficiently, a back-spike (i.e. a voltage spike in the opposite direction of the initial current) is required. Granted, the current of the back-spike produces a change magnetic field due to the velocity of the electrons, that actually detracts from the magnetic field of the initial "pre-back-spike" current, however the detraction from the magnetic field is totally overcome by the magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons. The magnetic field due to the jerk of the electrons therefore overcomes the parasitic effect normally associated with back-spikes.

The stronger the jerk relative to the ultimate velocity of the charge, the stronger this anomalous field. Therefore, when this anomalous field is strong enough to overcome the formerly dominant magnetic forces at play inside the atoms, this causes the paths of gyroscopic particles to align, and thus increase the radius of their path curvature, which forces them to spiral outwards. As the gyroscopic particles extend from atoms, and eventually the wire, they will either attract or repel the rotary consisting of the permanent magnet. Those that will attract it will latch itself to the permanent magnet, and thereby deliver its kinetic energy to the many particles inside the magnet, and in the process of attraction, cause it to rotate. Those that repel would do so and latch onto something else, or they may take a double-u-turn to later attract that same magnet, imparting even more kinetic energy to the magnet.

The Abraham–Lorentz force (or radiation reaction force) is proportional to the jerk of a charge and the square of its charge value:

In the physics of electromagnetism, the Abraham–Lorentz force is the recoil force on an accelerating charged particle caused by the particle emitting electromagnetic radiation. It is also called the radiation reaction force. The formula is in the domain of classical physics, not quantum physics, and therefore, may not be valid at distances of roughly the Compton wavelength (λ_C ≈ 2.43 pm) or below.^[1] There is, however, an analogue of the formula which is both fully quantum and relativistic, called the "Abraham–Lorentz–Dirac–Langevin equation". See Johnson and Hu.^[2]
The force is proportional to the square of the object's charge, times the so-called "jerk" (rate of change of acceleration) that it is experiencing. The force points in the direction of the jerk. For example, in a cyclotron, where the jerk points opposite to the velocity, the radiation reaction is directed opposite to the velocity of the particle, providing a braking action.

Now imagine the voltage produced by collapsing the magnetic field of the coil in a Newman motor. The large value of jerk which is directed opposite of the velocity of the charges would cause the electrons to radiate in front of themselves. This process would continue once the charge reverse direction, but this time the jerk would be accelerating the charges back towards the battery pack, as acceleration and jerk keep their "negative" direction. This is "overunity" basis of the Newman motor's recharging phase. So a radiation reaction force of the electrons, based on its jerk, may serve as a "normal" explanation for the "radiant energy" discovered by Telsa.

Note that in alternating current, if position was based on sin(t), then velocity would be based on cos(t), acceleration on -sin(t), and jerk on -cos(t), which implies that jerk of charges in an AC waveform would produce a radiation reaction that dampens the charge motion, hence, the great importance of the following exemplar of Tesla's work:

Of all the great inventions and discoveries of Nikola Tesla, nothing stood out with greater potential benefit to the whole of humanity than his discovery of Radiant ("Dark") Energy. Only after conducting exhaustive experimental trials for three years, did Tesla announce this stupendous discovery in a paper published in December, 1892, entitled "The Dissipation of Electricity". Incredibly, most academicians of the day completely missed the mark in understanding the true significance of his paper. Noted scientists such as Sir Oliver Lodge, mistakenly thought that Tesla was referring to high frequency AC electricity in the operation of the Tesla Transformer, a huge blunder that remains to this day in the misnaming and misinterpretation of the Tesla Coil. The transformer that Tesla referred to in the 1892 paper did not operate on magnetic/electric field induction created by alternating currents. It operated in an entirely new domain of physics based on abrupt discharges of electrostatic potentials and the subsequent release of kinetic Radiant Energy from the omnipresent ether/cosmos. Tesla was now operating under entirely new rules which he referred to as "dynamic"electro-static forces and had, by now, completely abandoned any further interest in the AC waveform. The genesis of the Lodge misunderstanding, however, began a few years earlier with the publication of certain mathematical formulas by a brilliant Scotsman named James Clerk Maxwell.

Note the existence of a magnetic radiation reaction force which is based on the second derivative of jerk with respect to time (i.e. "Crackle"), or alternatively, the fourth derivative of velocity with respect to time, which corresponds to cos(t). However, the force in this case is opposed to the "Crackle" instead of with the jerk, so the magnetic radiation reaction force actually corresponds to -cos(t). The result is that in an AC waveform, the magnetic radiation reaction force also puts a damper on the velocity of the charge, just like the Abraham–Lorentz force does!

The above might give the impression that AC operation is off-limits for a Newman device. Fortunately however, there may be a way to utilize one aspect of the Newman effect without having to use commutation. This involves letting the peripheral fields of the magnet induce the emf into the coil instead of having the lines of force directly next to the poles of a magnet do so. As the peripheral field lines of a magnet are actually reversed in the z-direction of the magnet, as per indicated by the torus nature of the magnetic field, the induced emf they generate in the windings they cut through is actually a forward-emf rather than a back-emf. However, the energy density of the peripheral field is quite low as can be seen on the top part of the picture at:

https://sites.google.com/site/kmarinas86/energy/newman-machine/Newman70.png

This is the other reason why most motors don't generate a Newman effect well. The energy density and total energy associated with the peripheral fields are both dwarfed by that associated with the direct vicinity of the poles as well as the magnet's interior where the field of the magnet is strongest. Notice the difficulty that Newman has had increasing the torque density of his motors. There may be a way to remedy this:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Q-Mo-Gen/conversations/messages/136

Implications for an electric motor of special design:

We will assume that the Lenz effect (back-emf) results from the magnetic component of the Lorentz force in the conducting wires of the circuit and does not result by considering the potential energy of the fields distributed through an arbitrary volume of space. We will assume that the potential energy of the fields distributed through space account for the mechanical work to be done and unused energy returned to the circuit through inductive collapse. If we make this assumption, we are in for an interesting surprise: We can cancel the Lenz effect without eliminating potential to do work!

One way to do this is to wrap a coil with a certain number of turns around a cylinder in a clockwise direction, and then wind another coil around the first-wound coil in series with first-wound coil. The second-wound coil should have a greater number of turns, but in the counter-clockwise direction. Hook this up to a battery, and the result is a magnetic field created between the first-wound (inner) coil and the second-wound (outer) coil. Place a permanent magnet at a right-angle to the shaft, a shaft that pokes through bearings in the sides of the cylinder. Use a commutator to reverse the field every half rotation. If you have the right ratio of turns on the second-wound coil with respect to turns of the first-wound coil, the back-EMF will be cancelled, and the dominant "energy product" of the fields will be that of the peripheral magnetic field of the permanent magnet overlaid by the field contained between the inner and outer coils. Due to the opposite rotation of currents of the inner vs. outer coils, the magnetic field of the coil current is more-or-less cancelled where the physical magnet is.

Another way to do this is to split an iron core into four identical post-shaped pieces (or, rather, use four identical stick-shape iron cores). Distribute these four pieces to four corners of a base. In the space between the four iron cores, place a magnet-shaft-bearing assembly as per the previous example, with the shaft ends each sticking between the two of the four iron cores. Finally, wind a coil around all four iron cores, forming a box-like coil. An optional way to wind would be to wind the coil around each of the four posts, one turn for each passing from corner-to-corner so that way they hug on all sides of each core, producing four sub-coils contained *inside* the main coil. As before, have a commutator connect to the circuit to reverse the polarity of the current every half-rotation. What will happen is that when the coil is turned on, the iron cores will align with the magnetic field of the coils. However, the peripheral field of the cores at the center will be inverted with respect to the central field created by the coils. This occurs at an axis centrally-positioned between the four posts, and this is where the permanent magnet resides. From the iron cores, the magnet will experience a magnetic field of greater magnitude and opposite with respect to the magnetic field brought to it by the coil. The result is that the magnet is attracted to the orientation opposite of what would be expected had there been no iron cores, and therefore the back-EMF is actually negative and will cause the rotor to speed up with greater torque until saturation point is obtained. Therefore, core materials with the highest saturation point are desired, and although such core materials are not necessarily those possessing the highest magnetic permeability, a core material with a high magnetic permeability is desired so that way the iron cores generate a magnetic field much stronger than the field from the coil.

What should one worry about with latter suggestion in the quote above? Having a magnet too close the iron will lead to cogging, when the objective is actually to induce current that magnetizes the soft iron cores so that the cores' peripheral fields (again, also inverted with respect to the z-direction of the cores) superimposed over the magnet to align it to a position advanced of its motion. When the right balance is found, my prediction is that a "miracle" result will occur - self-looping "overunity" behavior without any batteries or capacitors needed. This will require proper 3d modelling software, otherwise much will be wasted on mal-proportioned designs that get stuck in a "cogged" position.