Free Energy Revealed - Magnet Battery

[dolomo]

Exellent - How do I extract the power? Are you running anything with the volts?

because the amps are to low i can only slightly shine my led. i used an array of 3x6 magnets in series. (3 parallel * 6 in series)

BUT no offence to 0ne as i really like the work of Ed Leedskalnin: It must be a galvanic reaction because if i use a dime instead of my neo.mags i get even higer volts than with my mag because the dime has more surface than the mag. Just like the lemon battery principle. I even tried again with the trashbag and first i got some voltage but than i examined that there a some small holes in the foil. So i searched against a light for a proper foil and tried again. And this time the voltage was zero.

But as these are my first experiments with magnets since my school time, i will buy a real horseshoe magnet and will try again.

so peace alltogether
dolomo

[Jimboot]

Ok here's why I don't understand the galvanic theory. I can get 0.7 volts with a very old rusty steel gate hinge as the keeper with a dampened post it note between the horseshoe and the hinge. I don't understand where the chemical reaction is.

I can get 0.9 volts with a galvanic reaction using the keeper that came with the mag and a piece of copper pipe in a solution. When I hook this up to my mag battery in series I get 80% voltage drop.

Also can someone explain to me please, why the polarity changes depending on whether the probe is on another piece of paper on the other side of the keeper or simply on the keeper itself?


Thanks!

PS I reached 5 volts tonight :-)

[Jimboot]

also the amps keep  rising. I'll have to take some vid.

[tinu]

Koen1 stop running your mouth, I already made a video long ago proving its not a galvanic reaction by doing exactly what someone said. I used a trash bag that is made of plastic, with no moisture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQHLtSDwtyc

With low amp's from these magnets, trash bags do not work well. That is why you need a different type of dielectric or insulator, or whatever you want to call it in this case.
...

I think you really need to stop misinforming people because of your ego and/or lack of experience/knowledge. If you are to prove something, at least learn to take your (dirty) hands off the setup and use better quality equipments. I haven?t reply to your movie back then because it was so obvious that you have no idea about what?s going on there that I said why putting you in a bad light. But since you insist, you should know that the insulator of your voltmeter? leads is generating a small voltage when pressure is applied; your hands and body simply close the circuit. So, as you see, the voltage you measured has nothing to do with magnets neither with the plastic dielectric in between. (There are a myriad of other causes too leading to several mV up to hundreds of mV in your crude setup; before claiming a result you simply have to get accustomed to them and to learn how to eliminate/minimize their effects.) Now, if you have to reply to this post, do it carefully; better show a movie as it should have been done from the beginning or just let it go?

In conclusion: think twice before shouting to people and post less if you are not sure. Ideas are welcome. Ignorance and disinformation are not.

Cheers,
Tinu

[Koen1]

Koen1 stop running your mouth, I already made a video long ago proving its not a galvanic reaction by doing exactly what someone said. I used a trash bag that is made of plastic, with no moisture.

Then how come there are so few (if any) people who manage to replicate the effect when they do use a proper dielectric?
And why have you not repeated your fantastic proof with other dielectrics? Do the same test with like 10 different dielectrics,
then see what comes out of your setup?
Have you ever heard of the "Dry pile"? Look it up if you haven't. It's a very old setup of layers of aluminium and copper foil
seperated by pieces of paper, stacked to a height of half a meter or so, and with pressure applied to the top of the stack,
and it generates electrical charge. Electrostatic, but it does "recharge" by itself. No magnet needed.
The explanation? Galvanics plus electrostatics.

And untill you actually prove that it is not galvanic, which means more than one quick refuge bag test among
the many paper electrolyte "confirmations" of your observation, I am not convinced.
After all, have you checked how porous the plastic is? Why did you not use a dielectric that is commonly used
(instead of a garbage bag which nobody ever uses in a proper setup), a proper layer of plastic?
Do you think all types of plastic are equally good isolators?
And dragging Leedskalnin into the discussion doesn't help, as anyone who has studied electromagnetism
in detail recognises all the effects he observes, but knows more consistent explanations for them.
you can tell me to stop commenting, but you're just preaching your own belief here and untill I really
see a good reason such as real proof that it does work with zero humidity in the setup, your continued
insistence that you are right does not convince me.

With low amp's from these magnets, trash bags do not work well. That is why you need a different type of dielectric or insulator, or whatever you want to call it in this case.

Which just goes to show how much you understand of the entire em game, if you don't even see the huge difference between
a true isolator and dielectric and a paper "quasi-dielectric" and semi-electrolyte layer. Have you ever studied the internals of batteries?
I get the impression you have not. Otherwise you would know that many if not most old batteries commonly used moist paper as an electrolyte carrying medium.
And you would have known never to try that if you wanted to eliminate galvanic reactions.
But instead, you keep going back to the paper...

All I know is, the laws of physics are flawed. Physics doesn't even know what a magnetic field is made of. Tell me, is a magnetic field a wave or a particle?

I know the answer, do you?

Yes.
But I assume my answer is not the same as your answer.
The quick answer: neither. A magnetostatic field (a normal "static" magnetic field around a magnet) is neither, according to established physics.
It is a "field" of coherent spin structure in space. If that means anything to you.
In fact, in the context of relativity, magnetostatic fields are a relativistic effect of relative electron motion, as it has been proven
that an observer moving alongside an elecron with matching speed will see zero magnetic field. This implies any magnetic field
is in fact a relativistic effect, in "permanent magnets" also. Is gravity, another relativistic effect, a wave or a particle? Neither,
it is a curvature in the "structure" of space (or space-time if you will).

But I bet you in your Leedskalninesque model will say that magnetism is a flow of magnetic particles. Right?
Which are monopoles but can only exist as oppositely directed flows with the same direction of rotation.
Effectively thus they apparently cannot exist in any other form than that, and effctively the magnetic field
measurable is exactly the same as established electromagnetic theory predicts, and in fact there is zero
basis for Eds conclusion that the common observation must mean that these are such monopole curents.
But I bet you disagree there. After all, Ed managed to produce zero proof and lots of speculation, and that
must be more correct than what established physical science has been doing in the mean time eh?