Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[hoptoad]

@Vince    Quote: Hoptoad; My setup IS using solenoid coils with hollow cores but I have installed the solid armatures in them for my tests.  Should I remove the solid cores? Am I just wasting my time here Or is the effect worth replicating??
Vince"

If its easy to remove the armatures, then try it ! Try both and compare. I have no idea about any of the parameters of the machine your playing with, so the outcome is for you to discover!  It may not react like either of us expected. 

And no I don't think your wasting time, if your enjoying experimenting anyway. And you must be, else why would you ask ?    Hmmmmmm.......Prognosis says........bitten by the tinkers bug.........you'll survive  .........KneeDeep


@Tinu      Quote: "One can mess it with magnets but it would be wiser to do it only after documenting its un-hampered performances. And then a look at the two sets of figures may speak for itself."

I agree. I'll go further and infer that Documented Comparative studies are the best way to ascertain performance ratings and efficiencies.

@Tinu      Quote: "And then it appears out of nowhere a quick jump to the conclusion: Lenz law is bent"



@Tinu      Quote:" (I always laugh because of this verb; a law can not be bent by definition in its entire area of applicability. It?s either valid or not. And if it?s not valid, it ceases to exist as a law. So a law is always valid. At best the area of its applicability can be reduced: i.e. classical mechanics versus relativity, ohm in DC versus AC)."

Yeah, but "bending Lenz's Law" has got a poetic ring to it!      It's easier than saying "a study of the non-linear counter electro/magneto motive forces resulting from induced currents, in a high speed open magnetic alternator system".....phewww......KneeDeep
Seriously, don't take everything too literally. In my own works, I merely used this expression because it is the perfect symbolic analogy represented visually by the graph diagrams on page 10 which show comparative outputs versus braking reaction of, both, a closed and open magnetic generating system.

@Tinu      Quote:  "Well?! I can accept (although rigorous data and proof are needed) that Lenz law is, in the best scenario and most excited interpretation given to the actual experiments, ?bent? at around zero efficiency. But who cares? Who?s gonna make use of it? We are at >90% efficiencies already."

In all generating systems, the performance and efficiency ratings are gauged to a specific load range. When you extend the load range of any generating system, it's efficiency falls off. My experiments revealed that the non linear counter-MMF reaction of an open magnetic configuration, has the effect of extending the efficiency range of the alternator over a much greater load demand, as compared to a closed system. Also, the "bending" of the counter-MMF curve can occur well before coil short circuit conditions, and contributes to higher output efficiency at nominal loading which occurs with impedance matching.

@Tinu      Quote: "following your recent clear statement that the system is not OU, I tend to believe it?s an issue of impedance matching."

It is definitely not O/U, and while impedance matching plays an important part in output power and efficiency, it is not the only parameter "playing in the field". IMHO I think you are wrong to dismiss the possible beneficial aspects of this non linear behaviour. It can be exploited to extend generating output efficiencies.

Cheers all from The Toad Who Hops.....KneeDeep

P.S. I'm only referring to the generator output characteristics here. I'm not inferring any knowledge or opinion about the work of Thane or others with respect to the effects that external magnets may or may not have on motors and their performance.

[jacksatan]

Aether - Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot... Allow me to introduce myself - I am not a scientist. I am a businessman. I have an MBA, not a masters in electrical engineering. Despite my lack of science background, I have worked on venture capital placement in the fields as diverse as batteries, solar energy, and commodity trading. I am a skeptic of things that I have not seen before. I believe Jesus died more than 2000 years ago. I believe that Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years. I believe in the existence of black swans. I did not believe black swans existed five years ago. The reason I did not believe in black swans five years ago was because no credible person on earth had seen one, and people on earth have been almost everywhere. But realize, finding a black swan was not something everyone on earth cared all that much about. So not too many people were dedicating their lives to finding a black swan. I do not believe free energy exists. I don't believe it exists because no credible person has been able to prove it exists. Unlike black swans, many intelligent people have dedicated their lives to finding free energy. They have all failed. This is not proof positive that free energy does not exist. It is just a reason that it is unlikely.

Aether - you have repeatedly pointed out that it is impossible to test Thane's device on an unloaded system since the motor will run at max speed and their will be no discernable benefit from Thane's device. I have repeated suggested mechanically loading Thane's device and the motor without the magnets so there can be an equal comparison. Although you have grown quite irate along the way, you have never directly respoded to this suggestion (I personally think it's quite good). You have however, repeatedly indicated your lack of confidence that Thane's contraption would pass this simple test (ie. complete more mechanical work within the contraption than without) since the contraption is not fully optimized. Be that as it may, I can see much good coming from this test - even if the contraption does fail. Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2) when the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power? - what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?

[aether22]

Good grief!, I'm outta here! 

When we give up we give in, don't do it!

That's one ironic signature line considering he's throwing up his hands and leaving.

[aether22]

I found myself replying before remembering my promise, considered deleting, or posting privatly, but oh well...

Aether - Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot...

Probably.

Allow me to introduce myself - I am not a scientist. I am a businessman. I have an MBA, not a masters in electrical engineering. Despite my lack of science background, I have worked on venture capital placement in the fields as diverse as batteries, solar energy, and commodity trading. I am a skeptic of things that I have not seen before. I believe Jesus died more than 2000 years ago. I believe that Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years. I believe in the existence of black swans. I did not believe black swans existed five years ago. The reason I did not believe in black swans five years ago was because no credible person on earth had seen one, and people on earth have been almost everywhere. But realize, finding a black swan was not something everyone on earth cared all that much about. So not too many people were dedicating their lives to finding a black swan. I do not believe free energy exists. I don't believe it exists because no credible person has been able to prove it exists. Unlike black swans, many intelligent people have dedicated their lives to finding free energy. They have all failed. This is not proof positive that free energy does not exist. It is just a reason that it is unlikely.

I agree that is no proof and that proving such a negative is impossible.
I entirely disagree whole heartedly without the slightest iota of doubt whatsoever with your claim that "all have failed to find Free Energy". (of which there are 3 types, breaking the 1st 'law' (I believe possible given the right conditions but hard to prove), Breaking the 2nd 'law' (verifiably broken), or taking energy from some unseen source)

Aether - you have repeatedly pointed out that it is impossible to test Thane's device on an unloaded system since the motor will run at max speed and their will be no discernable benefit from Thane's device.

True.

I have repeated suggested mechanically loading Thane's device and the motor without the magnets so there can be an equal comparison.

Obviously if you remove the magnets the generator will not work.
So you must mean for a control, but how heavily would you load it? As heavily as the load supplied by the magnets when shorted without the full steel connection? (so it goes the same speed, problem is that is 0 RPM currently, it comes to a dead stop)
You could do that but the question would be what you could possibly achieve because once you replace the magnets you would need to remove the purely mechanical load or face twice the load.
Is this never the less what you are suggesting, so as to get an idea of the loading the generator has (or most likely has) when shorted with the full steel shaft? (actually it would not truly give the loading since the greater the speed the greater the loading and the generator swiftly rotates)

Maybe if you ran the test for a short enough time (a second) relying on inertia or calculating inertia into the equation somehow?

If so that would work very partially though I fail to really see the point as it would not prove or disprove anything and it would be so messy and estimated few would trust the results but I suppose it could be of some use.

If this is what you mean I apologize, what I thought you meant was load it mechanically both with the magnets and without (which would double the loading it experiences with), I am however sure that even if you did not mean that some others did.



Although you have grown quite irate along the way, you have never directly respoded to this suggestion (I personally think it's quite good).

I had but maybe I misunderstood the suggestion and responded to what I thought was being suggested?

You have however, repeatedly indicated your lack of confidence that Thane's contraption would pass this simple test (ie. complete more mechanical work within the contraption than without) since the contraption is not fully optimized. Be that as it may, I can see much good coming from this test - even if the contraption does fail.

Obviously it would not 'fail' the version I am considering you may mean in this message, it IS doing more work when the shaft is all steel, But much of that work is removable losses such as eddy currents and hysteresis etc...  if removed by a better core material, and covered in plastic to reduce aerodynamic drag possibly I am sure it would pass any version of the test.

Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2) when the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power?

Yes, it must be, now I wonder again just what test you mean.
The mechanical loading the generator places on the motor must increase dramatically under such a condition, the only way it possibly could not (since it does in vid 1) is if the motor (any kind) sends something through the shaft to reduce losses in this one specific generator type, that we can safely say is 100 times less likely than a specific generator effecting the motor.

- what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?

Well the test (any version) can be preformed if losses are reduced (relatively straight forward).
Or I have suggested an isolated version where the generator feeds 'whatever' into a motor mechanically loaded, but not the one driving the generator.
I have also suggested a whole host of other experiments what can further advance this and give a clearer picture of what is happening.

[aether22]

hoptoad, how sure are you that the effects you observed involved reducing the load of the generator?

Because in Thanes setup no such effect is apparent, but what is apparent is that if something from the generator gets into the motor the motor becomes more powerful and no other interpretation of the results makes any sense.

Are we looking at 2 different effects or just one? (Maybe losses in the generator are decreased by Thanes generator even when not connected to the motor only the loading is still too great since he does not have the required speed? one could ask why what works to improve a motor would not improve a generator)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Thane,

That you have replied to other messages since I asked if you were still going to send the generator my way but not replied to mine gives me an uneasy feeling, say it ain't so. (I guess I am probably just being overly anxious)

Anyway I am trying to make something with what I have, got some of the hard stuff built, from here I think it is mostly work with mounting the coils being the trickiest challenge, not really sure how much longer it will take.

One issue though is that I have no idea if what I am doing can work, obviously I imagine it could but I can also imagine it may not.
If you could run a simple test it could tell me if I am wasting my time.

I have a sych motor, with a pully which I am using to mount stuff on, in this case wood, I then have my steel disk securely attached, all up it has practically no eccentricity or wobble on the steel disk so I am happy.
On it obviously will go the magnets, above it the coil, the induction motor under test will have it's shaft make light contact with the disk but obviously not rotate with it, it will have a mechanical load placed on it. (initially something manual likely involving a grinding stone)

Now my generator will be rotating at 3000rpm (50 hz here) so it should be doing a decent job of creating back-emf/aether flow, but I simply do not know if the lack of co-rotation might stop whatever from getting into the motor and improving power

As a backup I could magnetically connect the steel disk to the synchronous motor but there will be no speed changes, possibly/hopefully amperage changes though but I fear that with the HP available from this larger motor and due to it running at a highly efficient state there may be little change, also this type of motor has not been tested before with this effect.


If you could take a universal motor and place a mechanical load on it and put it next to either free end of the axle on your current setup (while running) and see if it picks up speed when next to the Gen.that would be a huge help with my current efforts,

Thanks.