Reboot: Is the "delayed Lenz effect" real or just a misunderstanding?

[synchro1]

Well, this makes it the third time you write something I did not say or write as you wrote in your post.  Your audience can decide why you would do such a thing.

BTW, can you point me the post where I lied about you, as I'm not aware I did such a thing and would be more then happy to apologize if I did.

I think deep down you know that I do appreciate the opinion of EE as long as the message is done in a supportive way.
Maybe we can learn something from each other? ... I now see a supportive post: http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg429509/#msg429509

Kind regards


Luc

Nowhere nor at any time did Gotoluc call Milehigh a lier. Milehigh has proven in this way that he really ls a lier.

[gotoluc]

Nowhere nor at any time did Gotoluc call Milehigh a lier. Milehigh has proven in this way that he really ls a lier.

Please synchro1, I'm not asking for people to post there opinions... rather, trying to help us all see there are productive ways we can work together even if we see things in different extremes.
I think MileHigh is considering this approach and maybe why he has written a great post of his analysis to which I included a link to in my  post above.

The way I see it now is, MH is making an effort not to shoot down these experiments and rather be standing by to assist (if needed) so they can unfold themselves and that way we can all learn what we each need to lean. 

So now the ball is in your park, is there something you can learn from this which will assist the momentum to continue?

Kind Regards

Luc

[MileHigh]

Both of you:

My response to the accusation that I was a liar is in this very thread.  It will take you a few minutes to find it if you want to. It's not a question of shooting down any experiment or any person either.  It's just me sharing my technical evaluation of a given experiment or proposition with an expectation of getting reasonable feedback.  Just like there is the misnomer "delayed Lenz effect" there is the incorrect idea that you can manipulate magnetic flux through a generator coil by some other method that will give you a gain.  I have already rendered my opinion on that issue for Luc's new experiment so I don't have to say it again.  Some people that favour this proposition have told me that they don't believe me and this "new technique" will give some benefits.  That's their right and then we move forward from that point.

If I help Luc to get some meaningful data from his latest experiment then so much the better.  If he can get good data (which won't be easy but if you are determined then it is possible) the data will show that I was correct.  Nobody has to believe me right now if they don't want to.

Let's say that I am correct and the data shows nothing special and no gain.  Instead of just moving on, the ideal thing to do would be to go back and look at the original proposition and make a critical evaluation of it.  Understand what's going on and then a light goes off in your heads and you say, "I get it - redirecting flux with some external flux redirector system is no different than moving a coil past a magnet or moving a magnet past a coil - they are fundamentally the same thing with the same effects."

That would be the ideal knowledge gained from this experiment.  You have to truly understand the basic fundamentals.  Then next year when some funky design is put up by some YouTube guy in Moldavia (or wherever) that is just variation on the same thing - you guys can say I UNDERSTAND, this Moldavian guy's generator configuration is not going to do anything special.  That would be a big win.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

This is for TK, we briefly discussed the model of a water pipe for an inductor (or vice-versa).  I can't remember what thread it was on, may have even been this one, so here goes:

The skinny:   Inductance is often referred to as "electrical momentum" and in a water pipe you have the momentum of the moving water.  End of story....

Let's look in more detail:

Let's look at the various analogies:  (we are always working in an environment where water pressure is akin to voltage and water flow is akin to current (or vice-versa for both variables))

You apply voltage to a coil and the current slowly builds up over time.
You apply pressure to water in a pipe and the water flow slowly builds up over time.

You suddenly try to stop the flow of current in a coil by putting a resistance across it and you get a high voltage spike and rapid decrease in current flow.
You suddenly try to stop the flow of water in a pipe by putting a blockage at the end of the pipe and you get a high pressure spike and rapid decrease in water flow.

If you have current flowing through an ideal coil with no resistance, it will flow forever.
If you have water flowing through an ideal loop of pipe connected end-to-end, it will flow forever.

The voltage across a coil is the inductance of the coil times the rate of change of current with respect to time.
The pressure across a length of pipe is the mass of the water times the rate of change of the speed of the water with respect to time.

When you first apply voltage to a coil it acts like an open circuit and no current flows.
When you fist apply pressure to a pipe filled with water it offers infinite resistance to the water flow and no water flows.

The energy in a coil is 1/2 L i-squared.
The energy in a length of pipe is 1/2 the mass of the water times the velocity of the water squared.

In a nutshell, water flowing in a pipe is analogous to current current flowing through a coil and vice-versa.

The classic question is, "But where is the external magnetic field?"   The answer is that you IGNORE the external magnetic field, it does not count.  The only thing that counts is the energy associated with the external magnetic field.  That magnetic energy is equivalent to the mass of water in the pipe times the square of the speed of the water.  Some of you have to try to wrap your minds around that and this may help:  On the bench you measure current flow with your multimeter and you don't think about the magnetic field that much.  But the magnetic field is always there.  The inductance even in straight wires is always there.

What's a water model for an LC resonator?  Here, to make it simple, we have to think outside the box just a little bit.

Imagine a big coil of hose on the floor.   It's 100 feet of hose coiled up into a coil five feet in diameter.  One end of the hose is connected to a tall water tank with an open top.   The other end of the hose is connected to another tall water tank with an open top.

Here are the initial conditions:  The hose is filled with water.  One tank is filled with water all the way to the top and there is a valve that is closed shut preventing the water to flow.  The other tank is empty.

Now, when you open the valve you will have a water LC tank circuit that will oscillate back and forth between the two water tanks.

Now, some complainers may say that there is too much friction and it will not oscillate.  Put your brains in gear, you are imagining that there is almost no friction in the hose or anywhere else in the water circuit.  It it was frictionless then the water tank "tank circuit" will oscillate forever.

Water is a "perfect" analogy for electricity.  All that you have to so is understand the limitations or use your imagination to bypass the limitations.

It means the plumbing in your house is like an electrical circuit consisting of real-world inductors where there is resistance in the wires.

[TinselKoala]

No problems there, as you say the hydraulic analogy still works for inductors, considered as isolated circuit elements. And I'm sure most people have experienced "water hammer oscillators" in bad plumbing, I sure have. But what about magnetically coupled inductors? How do you model a transformer, say, in the hydraulic analogy?