Stepped Gradient Magnet Motor

[Low-Q]

Hi Vidar,

I agree with you on this, quote: "If you put a second magnet that will counterforce the sticky spot, the rotor will also get less torque build up due to the weakened sticky spot. The sticky spot (The most attractive point) is the very reason why the rotor want to approach it. This spot is equally attracting the rotor from both sides" unquote.

The rotor in such stepped gradient magnet setups will arrive at the strongest sticky spot with a certain rotational speed (with a certain amount of torque) gained en route to that spot, you may agree with this, it is not the last magnet (where the sticky spot is) which gives the full torque for the rotor.  Sure the rotor will loose the last and strongest attraction when I compensate that last attract force with an equal repel force but there should remain some torque from the earlier magnets' attraction,  no?

I also agree that using a coil to help the rotor to move through the last (i.e. the strongest) magnet, I can only receive a bit less useful output from my coil input (if I compare the two)  but in case the rotor already arrives into the sticky spot with a certain torque (kinetic energy) gained by normal attractions up to the last and strongest magnet (from the magnets preceeding the last magnet), then do not we have a chance to come out with a certain gain, whatever small the gain is?

Gyula

Well, you must see all the magnets in the steps as a whole. There is a reason why the rotor want to approach the magnet closest to its circumference, or radius if you want. The first magnets farthest away will as well attract the rotor, but the next and closer magnet will then be stronger and pull the rotor even further, and so on. When the rotor reach the last magnet, it will have built up some momentum. That momentum is a result of the magnets, and nothing more. There are no change in the magnets arrangements, or size when the rotor leaves them, hence no change in the attractive forces that act on the rotor. If we sample small steps (1 degree steps or less) in one revolution of torque and add them up, you will have zero torque as the final result.
This zero-result will multiplied to the angular velocity end up in zero energy. Hence no angular acceleration.


The steps are some how a little confusing to our mind, because the only thing this arrangement do is to smoothen out the forces, but the total magnetic force will be the same as if you combined all these magnets into one stronger magnet.


Assisting with coils into a system that does not produce energy in the first place, will ofcourse result in the same total energy output as you put into the coil.


Vidar

[gyulasun]

Hi Vidar,

All I can say is that it is indeed difficult to 'digest' in this setup when the rotor arrives at a position with a certain torque and if at that point the counter force does not exist any more due to compensation, then why the rotor should not continue its moving further on.
I think that I should try to build such setups for myself to experience that it is indeed not possible...      Have you built such stepped gradient motor setup I wonder?

I would like to show you a brief video on a Tri-gate setup, please tell your opinion.  (I do not think it is a fake.)  Did the magnets do work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCW6T7oKq2c 

Thanks,  Gyula

[Low-Q]

Hi Vidar,

All I can say is that it is indeed difficult to 'digest' in this setup when the rotor arrives at a position with a certain torque and if at that point the counter force does not exist any more due to compensation, then why the rotor should not continue its moving further on.
I think that I should try to build such setups for myself to experience that it is indeed not possible...      Have you built such stepped gradient motor setup I wonder?

I would like to show you a brief video on a Tri-gate setup, please tell your opinion.  (I do not think it is a fake.)  Did the magnets do work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCW6T7oKq2c 

Thanks,  Gyula

The video you linked to is not a fake, but it does not produce more energy than what is put in. I can write down a couple of pages why this isn't over unity, but I have no time doing so.
The effect you see here is not abnormal. It is a natural cause of interaction between mass, gravity and magnets.
I would bet a billion dollars that this wouldn't rotate if there was not a pendulum, but a rotor with two sticks arranged 180 degrees apart.
The pendulum swings higher on the right side without the tri-gate, but he doesn't show you that specificly. Watch it again and notice the swing when the pendulum goes back the first time - with and without the tri-gate.


I think some information is missing from my previous post.
When I said that the rotor will gain momentum, this is only true if you by hand put the rotor in a position where magnetic attraction is present. If you by hand put the rotor part in a position where it is attracted to the magnet it will for sure be pulled towards the most attractive magnet - the one which is closest. However, there is a dead spot somwhere on the rotors circumference where the rotor part isn't going anywhere. If you accidently push it the wrong way, the rotor part will approach the magnet in wrong direction. Pushing it slightly in the right direction, the rotor part will move towards the magnet in the right direction. This is easier to observe if you take away all the rotor parts except one.


When you are using several rotor parts, like the one in the picture, it is (As I indicated) harder to determine where this dead spot is. So try with only one rotor part at the time.
You can also add so many rotor parts you want so it finally looks like one solid disc. Imagine how a solid disc of iron will behave in this experiment. It will not start to move at all. It is the same deal as with only one rotor part, but without the cogging.
So using only one rotor part, you can easily examine the behaviour, and take samples of torque for each degree rotation. Sum it up and you will get just as much clockwise torque as counterclockwise torque.


This, and I speak to everyone, is a great lesson to learn how magnetism work as an energy source - or lack of.


Those who claim they have built a working magnet motor, which works without external energy source, are not telling the truth. Sorry. I don't call them liars, but dreamers who cannot imagine why such a motor can't work, and take a chance that some one will believe them in order to spice their dreams even more. I have been there - I know how you all feel :-)


Once I designed a magnet motor that had the same torque on both rotors except that one rotor spun 20% faster, hence 20% more energy than the other. The problem was just that I overloocked a very importand and devestating detail. It is not possible to build without loosing those extra 20% of energy. This was the closes to "EUREKA!!" I have ever been, but landed hard and brutal when I faced the facts.


The youtube video of this demonstration is shown here as an illustration (It does not work in real life):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDRorMyxdO0

[gyulasun]

...

In the video you posted there is more velocity with the magnets in place but the "stop" is well within the range of deceleration that the last gate will provide.

Hi webby1,

Thanks for your reply I understand most part of it. The last part I quote above is what I do not get. I agree there is more velocity with the magnets,  but what you mean on the "stop":  is it the highest position for the pendulum on both atthe right or left hand side?  If yes then it is rather difficult to tell from the camera angle used I believe.

Thanks, Gyula

[gyulasun]

The video you linked to is not a fake, but it does not produce more energy than what is put in. I can write down a couple of pages why this isn't over unity, but I have no time doing so.
The effect you see here is not abnormal. It is a natural cause of interaction between mass, gravity and magnets.
I would bet a billion dollars that this wouldn't rotate if there was not a pendulum, but a rotor with two sticks arranged 180 degrees apart.
The pendulum swings higher on the right side without the tri-gate, but he doesn't show you that specificly. Watch it again and notice the swing when the pendulum goes back the first time - with and without the tri-gate.

....

Hi Vidar,

Regarding the video I linked to, I did two screen captures as best as I could to see the highest swinging point for the pendulum on the right side, with the magnets and then without the magnets. Unfortunately, the camera angles are not exactly the same for the two cases but the camera height fortunately is more or less the same so the angle is not a drawback in this case to see how high the pendulum is able swing back on the right side: my estimation is that in both cases the height is 'almost' the same. 
I attached the two screen captures I did, probably an even better capture on the hights could be done with a video editor but I do not have such,  I made several captures to arrive at the two pictures below and I belive they show the highest points in both cases.

So I disagree with your statement I put in bold characters in your post quoted above.  If you disagree with the captures please make a better one which proves your sentence, maybe I missed the exact 00:00 video time where you see that. I saw the very nearly identical heights (which is the height of 6 CD plastic holders) at 0:38 and at 1:01.

Thanks for all your other explanations on the stepped gradient motor.

Gyula