Gyroscopic Inertia Generator

[MileHigh]

I was going by the diagram you posted(reply 20),and by the way the quanta rotor/coils are set up.
Thin coils,and thin rotor magnets--> (s@n) (ns) (s@n). The fields from the coils dont cancel out each other,in fact,they pull one another tight(if you can picture it that way)-much like stretching a rubber band. Having the two fields also neutralises the side ways pull you get from only one coil acting apon the magnet,and this also adds a little extra rotational force-not much,but a little.Here is the kicker-you hook the two coils up in series(reversed pole of course),and you drop your P/in by half,while maintaining the same(if not slightly more)attraction or repulsion force on the rotor. And believe it or not,attraction mode actually give a slightly higher force output than repulsion mode for the same P/in.

In your second configuration you are creating a bucking field. This is how my L.A.G opperated,and the results are the same as the first configuration.

TK:

I hate the term, but I had a "brain fart" with that diagram in post #20.  Do you find it hard to proof-read your own text?  Between that and a keyboard that eats keystrokes sometimes (drives me nuts) I have a hard time sometimes.  I read over my text and my eyes fly by the words and I miss obvious typos.  The whole time I was discussing that diagram I was "seeing" the coils in opposition when in fact they weren't.  It came as a shock.  I can't explain it beyond that.  It's just one of those things that happens sometimes.

So I have to retract a lot of comments where I made a big stink about that.  Also Scorch please accept my apologies because I was mistaken about this issue.

I can see the better performance with two coils in series on either side.  I also watched Tnman's clips.  For your comment about using a "C" core with rotor magnets passing between the gap, yes I think that would make for a really cool looking pulse motor.  Think of tying it in with the microcontroller and amplifier:  When the rotor magnet is approaching the "C" you are in attraction mode.  When the rotor magnet passes TDC, then you flip the polarity and you are in repulsion mode.  Now that would be beyond cool.

I am still flabbergasted that my eyes/brain where not working and the whole time I looked at the diagram I thought the drive coils were in opposition when they weren't.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Here is a little setup i threw together today to show the results between 1 and 2 coil setup's.

Attraction mode.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qE_tg5KUZ8

Repulsion mode
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyegkVYMnfw

Timan:

I looked at your clips carefully.  I fully agree that two coils in series is better than a single coil like you demonstrated.  It makes perfect sense because you have more field interaction.  Also, note that you did not put the two coils in cancellation mode like I was discussing in earlier posts.  If you flip the connections on one of the coils and redo the tests, you will see what I mean.   Also I was not sure about the polarization of the rotor magnet, and you can see my earlier post that describes that in detail.

Going back to your main test, you (and TK) might be surprised by what I am going to say:  You tested additive drive coils in attraction mode and in repulsion mode.  Attraction mode was tested on one side of the coil pair and repulsion mode was tested on the other side.  The force you measure is dependent on the angle between the magnetic TDC of the coil pair and the rotor magnet and you had decent, but not highly precise control over that.  When you went from the attraction test to the repulsion test the angles were probably different by a small amount.  Not having precise control over the angles and factoring in similar things means that your test results fell within a reasonably expected error tolerance.  60 grams, 65 grams, 70 grams are in fact very similar measurements considering the error tolerances.  So the real conclusion from your experiment is that the attraction and repulsion forces are approximately the same for the same configuration based on your data plus error tolerance.

MileHigh

[Scorch]

Hey MileHigh. 

You already wrote that the Conductor of the all his electronic experiments, including those found on his youtube channel ( www.youtube.com/user/PMMG4HYBRID ), and the Inventor of all the Quanta Magnetics devices and kits ( http://quantamagnetics.com ); "knows very little or nothing about electronics". And, now, you have written these same things about Aaron and Peter.

Are you also making the same claim regarding John Bedini?
Are you of the position that John Bedini doesn't have any training or a very limited understanding of electronics?

Please respond.

Kindest regards;

}:>

Scorch:

Unfortunately you have to take nearly every statement from Aaron and Peter with a grain of salt.  They are just two ordinary guys with a very limited understanding of electronics that have been winging it this whole time.  Neither of them has any educational training in electronics and with one scratch, it shows.

MileHigh

[Scorch]

Hey MileHigh. 

Apology accepted and don't worry about it.
All is forgiven and we are all here merely to learn, experience, and gain knowledge from this particular plain of existence and our soul evolution.

}:>

So I have to retract a lot of comments where I made a big stink about that.  Also Scorch please accept my apologies because I was mistaken about this issue.


MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Scorch:

No I am not making the same claims about John Bedini.  I suspect he knows his stuff but he doesn't let on.

MileHigh