Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

[TinselKoala]

@ all readers

    Is it a myth that magnets can do work cyclically
                                          or
     is it a myth that magnets can not do work cyclically ?

                Please find the attached  3 PDF files the new file  "Ramp 7.pdf", also (Mag ramp 1.pdf)
                and the file "resurrection.pdf " wihch I posted when I first asked this question under this topic.
                                     

"Can this series be looped?"

NO. 

[MarkE]

A closed system would be like this example-->a battery conected to an electric motor thats conected to a generator,thats conected back to the battery. The outcome is a negative result.

An example of an open system is--> a solar pannel conected to a motor thats conected to a generator thats conected to a battery. The outcome is positive.
The open system is a system that is conected to mother nature,and this is why the heat pump will output more energy than we had to put into it,as it uses the open system of nature to provide the extra energy.

If you wanted to know the capability of such a system, then you bound it.  One way to bound it is to substitute an artificial source for the sun.  This is actually done daily in the test of solar PV modules by their manufacturers.  Another way to do it is to use instrumentation to measure the incident sunlight.  This is also done daily at outdoor facilities such as the USA government's NREL facilities in Golden CO (who also do the former).  Now, the inputs and outputs of the system are known and the system has been virtually closed using maths.

Now, suppose that you have two heat pumps that you want to compare.  Unbeknownst to you:  one sinks its heat exchanger into clay soil 100' above the water table.  The other identical system sinks its heat exchanger into sandy soil 10' above the water table.  Both perform their job.  One uses far less energy than the other.  Because you left the systems "open", there is no accounting for why one does better than the other.  Instrumenting the heat exchangers once again allows measuring the actual input to the system and its performance can be rationally quantified.

[MarkE]

@ all readers

    Is it a myth that magnets can do work cyclically

Yes it is.

                                          or
     is it a myth that magnets can not do work cyclically ?

No it is not.

                Please find the attached  3 PDF files the new file  "Ramp 7.pdf", also (Mag ramp 1.pdf)
                and the file "resurrection.pdf " wihch I posted when I first asked this question under this topic.
                                     

You can draw cartoons all day long, it does not change the fact that you lose system potential energy with each traverse up and over a given ramp.  Just ask Ltseung how his and his Hong Kong inventor's group's efforts to build a SMOT that can close the loop have faired over the years.

[MarkE]

Now that things are back to normal maybe we can get into the crux of things. hehehe

@tinman

Yep, our second son is named Adam. He just graduated from university as a Software Engineer and started working two weeks later.

Maybe this post will help you a bit to see the magnet in a different light. hehehe

@TK

Your post went totally unnoticed although this thread is supposed to treat issues of magnet, myths and misconceptions, a superconductive magnet would be on topic as well and very apropos.

So why do you think it is possible for a magnet to "superconduct"? Why should it super conduct when it is near frozen solid when logic would have us think the opposite should occur. Freezing slows things down hence it should have a negative impact of the magnetic performance, but we see that nature will always want to surprise us with great effects that divulge much more then what is seen on the surface.

Maybe you didn't notice but metallic conductors exhibit increasing resistance with temperature.

So this, for me, just shows that even magnets are fighting against their own internal cancellation. You see, in our minds eye, most people may visualize that an atom is an atom, so all similar elemental atoms are identical copies of each other and we will think that this mass is composed of this perfect tapestry of 3D atomic get-togetherness and that every part of that mass will react in the same way. But in nature or man made devices, nothing is really perfect.

What are you even trying to say here?  Is this the head of a lovely garden path?

So the same applies to our magnets. You have perfect atoms and you have defective atoms. The perfect atoms are doing their job and have perfect liberty to do so. The imperfect atoms have a much harder time to perform since their physical imperfections render them weaker, slower and the majority of those weaker atoms will not be able to meet the perfect timing and thus they will work against the perfect atoms and all combined, you get this particular magnetic RMS performance that we see every day.

This is indeed a lovely garden path.

Neo magnets on the other hand are manufactured with a little more care in their elemental choices and the result is more magnetic action per mass but it will never equal that of a cheaper imperfectly made superconductive magnet. WHY?

Well, when the magnet gets frozen, what gets frozen are the weaker atoms that were causing all that internal cancellation inside the magnet and now that they are frozen, the perfect atoms can now work totally unhindered thus you now see the true maximum ability of that magnet. If that same mass of magnet was composed entirely of perfect atoms, you would not need to freeze it to liberate its full potential which would be multiple times stronger then a standard neo having the same mass. They would indeed become super duper magnets.

This is a marvelous hypothesis.  Got any evidence for this visit to Wonderland?

The superconductive analogy for this could be two guys, one is a very fit weightlifter and the other is this scrawny built guy and both are stuck in a meat freezer. While the scrawny guy is disoriented and shivering and complaining, the fit guy instinctively just starts doing push ups and by doing so can maintain a reasonable body heat. The scrawny guy then starts doing his own push ups but flops down after his 5th push-up, is rendered immobile and quickly freezes up. This leaves the fit guy alone, without any "distractions" to totally concentrate on surviving the ordeal.

What kind of SEM do we have to use to see these magnet bodybuilders and weaklings?

We are slowly getting closer since we are now at the nano technology stage and already some materials are really incredible, but we still have a ways to go before we get to the hyper technology stage where we eventually will be able to create objects, atom by atom. Here is a start.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EogdalfXF4c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSCX78-8-q0&index=1&list=PLB8KzsKt4e82elS9LsBKlXUxm4HEGkjUS

Now look at this one. Listen to the sound of an atom moving. The crunchy sound has so much power in just that one atom that is dragged on a surface. Imagine the sound they must make when their cores swing in tandem to a passing magnetic or pulsed influence.

Imagine the pitter patter of female atoms watching the manly pumping of the buff male atoms. Imagine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbLvy-ayi4A&index=3&list=PLB8KzsKt4e82elS9LsBKlXUxm4HEGkjUS

The above also applies to the notion of an ideal coil. There is no ideal coil because copper atoms have the same problem. If you could sift through a pile of copper atoms and pick only the perfect ones, then make your copper wire with those, you could then wind an ideal coil where the turns do not touch (to prevent cross cancellation). With perfect copper wire, you should be able to pass all the power of a car batter through a 16 AWG wire. Resistance would be zero since resistance winds up being the percentage of atoms that cancel out a known energy input.

Why not 30 AWG or 40 AWG?

The point I am trying to make is this. Magnets suffer from the same problem our copper wires suffer from and that is built-in internal cancellation. For the magnet, there is nothing really we can do to better this and for now we have to accept the magnetic forces available to us but at least a frozen magnet shows us that the true magnetic ability can be multiples of times higher then the original design usage if cancellation can be reduced. We already have started long ago by producing oriented steel cores and laminations (what @JackH played with when he was a live) so we actually do know that by orienting atoms, their internal swings will be more in tandem to one directionality thus being more responsive to the single directionality of a passing magnet or a pulsed primary coil. 

You are way, way down your garden path now.

The second point is much more important for all of us since we work our copper coils manually. The magnet is telling us, "it's in my atomic make-up and my atomic make-up influences the copper atomic make-up", so if we keep treating our copper wire atoms as only being influenced by a passing magnetic "field", we will be stuck just as we are now, since we have 100 something years to prove it. We will not design our devices with direct pointal intent. We will always think the field permeates all and does the same thing to ever copper atom in the same direction of output influence and this field just homogenizes copper atoms to all react in the same way. That is a total fallacy that guys have to get out of their heads if they are to advance. Otherwise, why is gold wire a better conductor?

Gold is the inferior conductor.  Copper has almost 1.5 times the conductivity of gold.  When you are going to construct a garden path it might help if you don't rely on complete fantasy.

There is a very simple proof of this that we see guys experimenting with everyday. Pass just the south pole of a magnet beside the end of a coil with a core. The magnet approaches the coil, we see the scope rise from zero then fall to zero. The magnet departs from the coil, we see the scope fall from zero then rise to zero. Both scope directions in one passage by one polarity of the magnet. Think about that. The coil is wound in a circle of 360 degrees. The supposed field of the magnet cannot have two directions of impress since it is the same polarity at work on both sides of that one end of the coil. IT HAS TO BE THE COPPER ATOMS THAT ARE SWINGING IN ONLY ONE DIRECTION BUT THE 360 DEGREES OF THE COIL TURNS IT INTO TWO DISTINCT HALVES OF A SINEWAVE, SO ONE DIRECTION, ONE POLARITY CAUSES TWO SUCCESSIVE BUT OPPOSING OUTPUT POLARITIES ON A CIRCLE OF WIRE. YES THE COPPER ATOM CORES ARE ALL TURNING THE SAME WAY WHEN LOOKED FROM ABOVE, BUT FROM INSIDE THE WIRE, THE DIRECTIONS SWITCH. There is also a great deal of cancellation involved here as well while you see that sinewave.

No, it is as was found nearly 200 years ago:  The rate of change of the flux density crossing a conductor sets the induction.  You can set the most powerful PM you can find next to a wire all day long and as long as neither moves and you don't use an external permeable piece to alter the field, there is no induction.

Only if we change our perspective of what and how and why our copper atoms respond to magnetism, can our natural imagination kick into a new gear and new toys will abound from there. Once we realize the physical limitations of the copper materials we use today, we will learn to work around those problems and bingo, OU will start to be more of a normal thing then this all consuming impossibility we are trying to fight against every day. But in the interim there are many new ways to do experiments already and new things to learn.

Perhaps if you would first learn how things actually behave rather than asserting one wrong claim after another you might be able to use things like magnets and wires to advantage.

Now imagine this and I know this is another long @wattups post with lots of blah blah, but this is the only way I know how to explain stuff from bench and logic works. Imagine your copper wire. It has perfect atoms and a varying degree of defective atoms. Some atoms respond perfectly to all the frequencies, some atoms, will respond to the resonance frequency showing the highest spikes on the scope but those atoms are much fewer in number hence your amperage drops and voltage rises. Some atoms are so defective that they only respond to a small range of frequencies. So basically, if one 14 awg wire was pulsed with several frequencies at once, 2,3, 4 or more, each time you add a pulse and the frequency arrives at a frequency that makes more copper atoms swing, your output will increase. Add another frequency and if you find the right one where the output increases further, you just struck another good frequency for a good number of those atoms. So you can have pulsing several frequencies into the same wire and if they are well tuned, you should be able to produce as much energy as the rated AWG of the wire.

That's more assertion without evidence.

When the law of conservation was written, so pompous an idea, they forgot to mention, "if man continues on the same road we are on now (which was then), he will never get OU". My personal way of saying it is, "if man does not smarten up and shed all this field/electron crap, they will never realize news ways of winding coils to circumvent the atomic constraints of our copper wire and take advantage of the pointal magnetic influence and therefore the laws will prevail".

Asserting pant load after pant load of BS does not lead to new knowledge.

wattsup

[allcanadian]

@wattsup

IT HAS TO BE THE COPPER ATOMS THAT ARE SWINGING IN ONLY ONE DIRECTION BUT THE 360 DEGREES OF THE COIL TURNS IT INTO TWO DISTINCT HALVES OF A SINEWAVE, SO ONE DIRECTION, ONE POLARITY CAUSES TWO SUCCESSIVE BUT OPPOSING OUTPUT POLARITIES ON A CIRCLE OF WIRE. YES THE COPPER ATOM CORES ARE ALL TURNING THE SAME WAY WHEN LOOKED FROM ABOVE, BUT FROM INSIDE THE WIRE, THE DIRECTIONS SWITCH. There is also a great deal of cancellation involved here as well while you see that sinewave.

This is one of those experiments a person has to do at the bench to really understand what is happening. As the magnet moves towards the coil the magnetic field could also be said to be expanding into that area. That is the coil does not know whether a magnetic field is moving with a magnet or if the magnetic field is expanding/contracting from another coil. As Faraday said-- it does not matter how the change occurs only that it does.


If the magnet is moving towards the coil the magnetic field can be said to be expanding into the coil area which induces a voltage across the coil terminals (+/-).
If the magnet is moving away from the coil the magnetic field can be said to be contracting from the coil area which induces a voltage across the coil terminals (-/+).
If the magnetic field is not expanding into an area or contracting from it then no voltage is induced and we see this when the moving magnet is aligned at the center of the coil.


Note an expanding N field induces the same voltage polarity as a contracting S field and an expanding S field induces induces the same voltage polarity as a contracting N field.


I use the standard terminology so people might understand what I am saying however I don't use them personally. There are no lines or fluxes or flows or poles or polarity in my view and they are simply a convenient distraction inhibiting people from learning and thinking for themselves. Our universe is actually very simple in it's nature, it's so damn simple it defies the imagination, lol.


AC