Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[polarbreeze]

...I will offer 3 to 1 odds to anyone who wants to bet that this is over unity... any takers?

Be careful, you need to also specify that the only units that qualify are Watts: not orgone, chi, torsion, zpf, manna, bions etc. Just Watts - otherwise you could lose your shirt.

PB

[JustMe]

The graph (it's not mine, by the way, it's from a standard induction motor datasheet) shows the relationship between rpm, torque and current. You are wrong in your assumption that it "doesn't cover ... etc" - it applies to ALL situations, whether you're starting from zero, from some arbitrary rpm or whatever. I suggest you re-read the paper. The results that Thane has reported are fully consistent with a motor characteristic of this kind. Yet he speaks of a discovery of unexpected results which could lead to great advances in motors/generators. The results, though, are NOT unexpected: they are exactly as predicted by theory and prior empirical evidence.

Your graph does not illustrate predict or explain (because it's not designed to) the resumption of standard changes in speed, torque and consumption from a steady state rpm.  Common sense dictates that that requires that something give (or take).  If you misunderstand me again it can be nothing but deliberate.

Repeating yourself and your pet link will not change the fact that Thane has noted the very properties you and your graph describe more than once. From one of the videos: "Now an induction motor is kind of cool in that as it accelerates it requires less and less power..." You are putting out a total red herring, and it was already old yesterday. The unexpected results are not the acceleration/decrease in consumption on their own (though the process may be augmented or attenuated by the presence of the external influence) , but in contrast to the deceleration without a clear magnetic (or whatever) path between the motor and the flux (or whatever) created at the generator.  The magnetic brake theory could indeed be the primary thing at play here, but it's far from proven, quantified, qualified or any other such thing. No justification whatsoever for your clear and unambiguous statement that "we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all".  Where'd all the love for copious data go?

In summary, you seem to have been unaware of the standard relationship between acceleration and power consumption in an induction motor, and compounded that knowledge deficit with an assumption that others were unaware as well.  This has led you to misunderstand what Thane feels is the significance of his observations. That's your problem, not his, and moves nothing over from the unknown column just yet.

2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including....

It's not a little loose end that needs tying up, it's the entire foundation of the observations. Nothing's changed.

[aether22]

I am attempting to read through this entire thread.  I presume that from the above post that I can freely build this device for personal and research use?

If so, where may I obtain the necessary documentation to build one? 

I have a master electrician and a mechanical engineer on-hand to build your device for testing purposes.  I will personally travel to your lab if/when we replicate the effect that you have demonstrated and obtain satisfactory measurements.


May I please get approved documentation from you to get this device built? 

Thank you,

I am sure Thane would be happy to show you his device running in person if you would like.
As for the details of the device anything that you are unsure of just ask but if you read the complete thread then you will have most of your questions answered.

The best way to build Thanes device is to buy the parts that Thane uses from the same place, not sure what page but Thane did put the links in the thread somewhere.

But basically the device is:
A bench grinder (cap start induction motor, Ryobi)
1/2 inch shaft
Steel wheelbarrow wheel (from online store).
Neo magnets (also from the same store, and holders too I think) 6 will do but Thane is using 18.
And coils, of which Thane mentioned ohms ranges in one post and I think he mentioned the main AWG he uses, though the device has been successfully replicated with coils of fewer turns than Thanes and different wire gauges.

The coil core can be anything from simple solid steel, to laminates to hollow tubes (masonry anchor sheaths). (the latter not having been tested by Thane personally yet I don't believe)

[polarbreeze]

2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including....

It's not a little loose end that needs tying up, it's the entire foundation of the observations. Nothing's changed.

OK, let's focus on what we agree about then. I agree with your statement that the "entire foundation of the observations" is now this brass-vs-steel thing. Let's move forward from there. It's a good place to focus.

PB.

[aether22]

The graph (it's not mine, by the way, it's from a standard induction motor datasheet) shows the relationship between rpm, torque and current. You are wrong in your assumption that it "doesn't cover ... etc" - it applies to ALL situations, whether you're starting from zero, from some arbitrary rpm or whatever. I suggest you re-read the paper. The results that Thane has reported are fully consistent with a motor characteristic of this kind. Yet he speaks of a discovery of unexpected results which could lead to great advances in motors/generators. The results, though, are NOT unexpected: they are exactly as predicted by theory and prior empirical evidence.

Your graph does not illustrate predict or explain (because it's not designed to) the resumption of standard changes in speed, torque and consumption from a steady state rpm.  Common sense dictates that that requires that something give (or take).  If you misunderstand me again it can be nothing but deliberate.

Repeating yourself and your pet link will not change the fact that Thane has noted the very properties you and your graph describe more than once. From one of the videos: "Now an induction motor is kind of cool in that as it accelerates it requires less and less power..." You are putting out a total red herring, and it was already old yesterday. The unexpected results are not the acceleration/decrease in consumption on their own (though the process may be augmented or attenuated by the presence of the external influence) , but in contrast to the deceleration without a clear magnetic (or whatever) path between the motor and the flux (or whatever) created at the generator.  The magnetic brake theory could indeed be the primary thing at play here, but it's far from proven, quantified, qualified or any other such thing. No justification whatsoever for your clear and unambiguous statement that "we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all".  Where'd all the love for copious data go?

In summary, you seem to have been unaware of the standard relationship between acceleration and power consumption in an induction motor, and compounded that knowledge deficit with an assumption that others were unaware as well.  This has led you to misunderstand what Thane feels is the significance of his observations. That's your problem, not his, and moves nothing over from the unknown column just yet.

2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including....

It's not a little loose end that needs tying up, it's the entire foundation of the observations. Nothing's changed.

Ok, first all normal electric motors pull less current the faster they rotate.
But they produce less torque (less mechanical power), because there is less current and hence a weaker magnetic field. (and in induction motors less rotor inducing slip also)

Vince has proven that when the shafts are coupled the thing that changes is not a reduction in magnetic breaking (which of course the main thing that slows down the motor from it's top freewheeling speed) which can not possibly be reduced but an increase in motor output as measured.

Polarbreeze, again I say if you are doing this for free what is your motivation?
You are not winning any arguments, convincing anyone, you are clearly not actually interested in the device or you would visit, in fact I question if you really live where you claim and I doubt you are who you claim because if you had experience in induction motors as you claim you wouldn't have confused it with a synchronous motor as you did earlier.

You are full of it, you know it and we know it, and you know we know, so why are you still here?