Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

[MileHigh]

Luc:

This is from the first posting in your thread:  "If you wish to post in this topic please keep it on topic and constructive as I reserve the right to edit or delete any post that are not so."

You are not living up to your own credo, shame on you.

Quite the contrary, my test is very comparable to JLN. We are just using different sizes of magnets, mounted on different surfaces and placing them in different locations.

Yes I substantially agree.  I was ignorant of the fact that apparently transverse magnetic fields passing through the Finemet tape material can increase the inductance.

His large magnet will make his wheel vibrate which makes the sound you think is motor action. Mine is at most 10% of the size of his, so obviously won't be affected as much and it is also being held by a small steel lamination dampened by my fingers. You're also not comparing how much power he is putting in his coil compared to mine.

I don't think it is motor action, I know it is motor action.  The power to make the magnet vibrate clearly comes from the pulsing toroid.

The key thing is this:  Often two or three effects can be happening at the same time, and in a purely linear system they will all just add together.  Armed with the new knowledge that I know have, I would state that two effects are happening at the same time, 1) increased inductance from the effect of the external magnetic field, and 2) apparent increased inductance from the motor action.  My gut feel is that the second effect is stronger than the first effect.  In the case of your experiment, my gut feel is that the first effect is stronger than any possible second effect.

So all this is giving you a false impression that these test are not the same. Seeing a schematic will also not conclude anything. Both are coils being turned on and off.
How different and complicated is that

My impression has been modified, but if I assume for the sake of argument that the motoring effect in the JLN clip predominates and the motoring effect in your test is negligible or nil, then the two tests are still fundamentally not the same.

I will just repeat to you that whenever you demonstrate a circuit you should spend the few minutes to draw a sketch of the circuit and show where your measuring points are.  This is a common courtesy that all experimenters should do for each other.  I noticed that you were a bit embarrassed when working with Verpies because you had no schematic to show.

Here you are arrogantly making a mockery of JLN test based on your ignorance that a magnet cannot increase inductance

Yes, I scolded JLN because his point does not make any sense like I already stated.  Running a test and them making a point that does not make sense is a fail and he should have known better.  Nor was he aware of the motoring action.

and you come up with your own BS motoring hypothesis.

The motoring is 100% correct and you have been doing energy research for something like six years and you should realize this yourself.  There has to be a power source to make the magnet vibrate - it's a motor.  Whoops you are getting nasty and breaking your own credo.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Luc:

The one who is off the clouds is you! and you could of saved your face a little but you've openly admitted (above) that you've already seen my video back in 2011 and failed to remember what should of been obvious at the time.

Now you are scolding me for not remembering seeing a clip made by you in 2011 and now it is 2016?  You are being rude and breaking your own credo.

What are you doing here???    are you not at least capable of learning something form someone who is supposed to know less than you?

I just demonstrated that I am perfectly capable of learning something.  What's your problem?

May this be a lesson to you and all your followers that you don't have all the correct answers based on what you have learned from the past. There are new products like Finemet that you obviously know nothing about.
So it's fine if you don't want to do experiments but don't think you know all the answers as things are changing fast and in time you'll be an old school dinosaur.

So better stop your BS now before you really sink your ship... or should I say shit?

Luc

Wow, you just had a "release," does it feel good?  You broke your own credo again.

So why don't you go back and edit your posting and censor yourself to bring it in line with what you want to see in your own thread?

MileHigh

[wattsup]

Dear Luc.

Not quite a pond but at least there's no breeze to upset things !!   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YCAFvvbxuk

Cheers Grum.

@Grumage

I left this comment on your video.

@Grum C Think of the attraction as not coming from your polar horizon. Think that the magnet wants to point straight 3000 miles under your feet to the polar positions of the Earths core, not the Earth surface, that's a fallacy. You would see this if the magnet was in a gyro mechanism. I think I can see your boat tipping deeper in the water at the blue mark. That's why it wants to veer off the plate to find a better straight angle down, which it can only find at the equator or the poles to be still.
Search this video on youtube Understanding Magnetism Science Documentary Full Length Documentaries Look At 6:40. wattsup?
Added the video link here but could not in youtube comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6-Tx6j5nf0

Wattsup:
I made a few short comments a week or so ago about your proposition.
I am attaching a drawing showing two auto-transformers for you to contemplate.  I am assuming that you would agree that a coil in an auto-transformer setup is almost acting like a potentiometer in the sense that it acts like an AC voltage divider? MileHigh

@MH

Hmmmmm. That simply confirms HCS. Variac is the same. You will need to think very deeply about this one. It's not easy to mind play but you will soon realize that alternating current cannot exist with a ground if electrons move in the wires, you would have a short circuit at every half cycle. We don't need to get to technical to understand the logic. It still took me a good five years to figure it out. But it is very possible with Spin Conveyance since for SC, there are no electrons, conveyance is by the stationary copper nuclei that work like gyro magnets. Just look at the best images of Atoms and you will see some perfect, some not perfect, some squeezed together. Resonance happens when you get to a frequency that permits the most number of copper atoms to gyro at once but that does not mean you get amperage. So simple. Since the atom nuclei is the one doing the work, its too and fro spin can accommodate a change of "direction" without changing the ground. But as in DC, AC primaries still suffer from HCS. Ahha.

I will put more soon. But please if you have better proof of AC under electron flow, let me know and we can look at it together. I have to say that I have learned a lot since the old days and a lot of it was with you guys @MH, @poynt99, @verpies and many others, it was your solid EE base that saved me tons of work to substantiate constructs but guys, I really think SC will explain every single effect on our benches and most importantly provide a visual basis that all experimenters can share when explaining effects.

However, as interesting as it is you're not going to get people attention until you build a device that will prove your suggestions. Have you done this yet?
I build things to demonstrate what I'm suggesting and still don't get much feedback from people.
That's just the way things are.
Thanks for sharing. Luc

@gotoluc

I know a picture (1000 words) a video (priceless) but only once you first figure out how to go about explaining something that is by its nature very difficult to explain. So I am searching for ways to show.

I watch ever single one of your videos as I do with other @members and am always appreciative of your content and approach. I probably have a good 20 posts in your subdirectory on my computer (many subs for many @members) that was never posted simply because at those times I was thinking "These guys are not ready yet for this", and this was my mistake since no one will ever be ready, but still I did not want to go and steer your efforts away from where they were going even if I thought at times they were going nowhere special. This is my mistake. I will try and work against my inner over-analysis. I am always looking for ways to push the limit, to go a little further off the beaten path so guys can have more angles of observation, not just the standard book of EE formulas that have been used and reused so many times we are losing count.

Example: There could be a whole new science revolving around rebiasing transformers. If the fixed atoms in the cores and the copper wire are randomly arranged, this would explain all the losses we experience in our coils since an impulse is the same as a magnet passage that can only act on a certain amount of those atoms that are favorably positioned. It would then be logical to presume that if more atoms were sharing the same alignment, once you find the resonance frequency for those atoms, either the voltage output or amperage should increase. The rebias has to be done with a pulse that will be multiple times stronger then the working pulses so the new rebiasing holds a new but more widely shared latent position.

So take any transformer with a primary and secondary. Find the resonance where the highest voltage is seen on the secondary. Try and measure the amps as well. Write those down. Now find yourself at least a 2 foot length of heavy copper wire. Wind the first foot around the coil leaving 2" at the start end free and the 1 foot length also free from the other side. Put the 1 foot length to a car battery negative. Spike the other end to the positive terminal 3 or 4 times giving it good zaps. Redo your test and see if you now have a new resonance frequency (if old frequency is not resonant any more) and measure output.

The zapping can be done by winding the "Zapper Wire (ZW)" around the coil or the ZW can be configured into a pancake type coil and held only one one side of the coil and zapped (like on the end of a coil that has a passing magnet) then on another side of the coil and zapped, etc. There has to be a method to realign those coupling atoms in a same "direction", were  more will respond to a given frequency. This is a whole new avenue and would require one whole department to study the effects but for the OUer, it is one more method to add to our arsenal of effects. But it has to be better understood and to do that it takes time and a real effort and methodical record keeping.

@Bob Smith

Thanks, I will have more soon. hehehe

wattsup

[MileHigh]

Webby:

Heat, understanding heat, knowing where it's going, knowing how and where and when it's being produced are critical things to consider when you are trying to understand the energy dynamics of any device.  I have pushed the issue a bit but I don't think it's getting much traction and it seems to be fading out of the discussion.  When engineers design cell phones and tablets they agonize over heat issues.

Without being conscious of heat, you can observe many things that look like they are contrary to what "should" happen.  You have to keep your eye on the heat.

Typically, heat is the end of the line.  You drop a book on the floor and you just produced an explosion of heat.  All the walls, the floor, and the ceiling in the room get a fresh coat of heat.

When you are doing cardio exercise, you can say your heart is doing three things, 1) powering your muscles, 2) keeping you alive, and 3) working to expel excess heat.  I am usually quite conscious of how much of my cardio energy is working to expel excess heat when I exercise.

MileHigh

[woopy]

Interesting, I never thought a physical magnet could have interaction with the earths magnetic field to do work.
Have you built such a device and seen it work?

Thanks for sharing

Luc

Hi Luc Tinman Mag and Grum

Here my experiment

https://youtu.be/qNA37WSB8Nk

Youp veird

Hope this helps

Laurent