12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

[ltseung888]

Fourth design of a Flying Saucer

Proof of Concept experiment should be easy.  Will someone shine?

The permanent magnet moves at high speed (high centrifugal force) at the top and moves at low speed (low centrifugal force) at the bottom.

The net force will move the vessel upward.

I regard this as a Divine Revelation.  A human being cannot be that smart.  It is too simple to be wrong.

This may be primary school stuff.  We have graduated from kindergarten...

Lawrence
reply 3156

[ltseung888]

I have tried these as well,, I have been playing with things for many years,,

There is more in the area of applied forces than what you are thinking,, or showing anyway.

Not to mention the angles of those forces and there interactions.

Do you mind sharing your valuable experience?


If you have done similar experiments, please elaborate on:
1.  Diameter of the Donut
2.  Size, shape and type of magnet
3.  Number of winding of the energy supply coil and the pulsing method
4.  Number of winding of th energy take out coil
5.  The maximum velocity achieved at the top
6.  The minimum velocity at the bottom that still allows continuous motion
7.  The resultant net centrifugal force
8.  Can multiple wheels be joined to form a cylinder?


Any other information you wish to supply.


My gut feel is that both China and USA military research establishments have master this or similar techniques.  USA has MIT to do basic research.  China has Tsinghua University to do the equivalent.


We are still at "primary school" level.  But we can move along if some focus on theory and some focus on experiments.  My choice is theory.


Lawrence
reply 3156

[ltseung888]

At least two groups in Hong Kong are interested in doing the fourth flying saucer proof-of-concept prototype.


I shall let them do their own posting.

[Pirate88179]

At least two groups in Hong Kong are interested in doing the fourth flying saucer proof-of-concept prototype.


I shall let them do their own posting.

If they do their research, and work really hard...they might just invent the Frisbee.

Bill

[ltseung888]

My donut was a hool-a-hoop that I cut in half,, 2 circles,, and a very simple cart to hold the magnet,, the coils I had lying around and they were chosen because they fit around the hool-a-hoop with the cart in place.  They came from a power supply from a copier machine.

This setup provided little information due to the cart not moving around overly well,, like where I had to make the vertical cut to get the coils on there was a bit of a thump and stuff like that....

I shall answer your post in sections.

You tried to use a standard hool-a-hoop and failed to get the magnet to move smoothly around.

The Centrifugal Force generated was close to zero.  No useful information can be gained.

The Centrifugal Force equation is mv*v/R.  m should be as large as possible.  v should be as high as possible.  R should be as small as possible.  The diameter of a standard hool-a-hoop is many centimeters.  The friction inside the cut open tube was expected to be extremely high.  From your description, you failed to get the magnet to move even one complete revolution without the energy take out section.  The pulsing mechanism was not powerful enough.

The discussion I had with a Hong Kong group is to use a specially designed and machined nonmagnetic tube (donut) not more than 5 centimeters in diameter.  The magnet cart would be specially designed to be a perfect arc to move within the tube. A round rod-like magnet can sit in this cart.  All air would be sucked out to reduce air resistance.  The machining should be good enough to allow the magnet to rotate a few hundreds rotations per minute without the energy take-out mechanism.
The pulsing mechanism will be discussed later.

This is unlikely to be a garage mechanic experiment...  The USA and Chinese Military Establishments or top Universities would have the resources.

More to come later.  We can at least think out and lay out the design in this thread.

Lawrence
reply 3156