Magnetic Permeability ... I can't find anyone talking about this !!!!!

[X00013]

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/RT/2006/RX/RX54S-siebert.html

[The Observer]

Sudo,

On your video,

At 1:49 you pull out the 1/2 core and the peak voltage drops by 1/2.
      Then when you put it back,  it stays at 1/2 the previous peak voltage.

       That's wierd !
       Doesn't seem like you changed the physical characteristics of your setup that much.

Would be nice to see the inductance of a serious copper wire coil without any ferro vs. w/ferro.                               
                             -------------------------------------------------------------
You  said...

You may be correct about the speakers, but one could re design them to work with a magnet and no ferro

Well, when I said no ferro.. I mean the High Coercivity Ferros as well as the Low Coercivity Ferros.
           This means you can't use a magnet that utilizes the free limitless energy that powers atoms.
         
                                                Ferros add energy to the speaker system...

                Ferro System Energy - 2 Coil System Energy = Energy Contributed by Ferros.

                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------
You said...

From my studies, I have found that resonance is what we want

I couldn't agree with you more !

As the only other thread I have started here... why is an Acoustic Guitar is Louder than an Electric?
                                                                             is about the non-linear behavior of Resonant Systems.

I guess you know that a RESONATING TRANSFORMER exhibits some PECULIAR CHARACTERISTICS..
________________________________________________________________________________

Nueview,

If I understand your first question correctly,
         You want to know what happens to the current in the secondary after the primary has reached the current
         sufficient to saturate the core, thus not allowing any further "amplification" from the dipoles from the core?

         My guess is that Sudo will agree with me...
                                                                                 any further current adds only what difference in  magnetic field
                                                                                 is supplied by the primary...
                                                                                 A Magnetic Hysteresis Loop will show this.

Your second question... I'm gunna need pictures.
                                         I do agree that everything is moving... The Universe... Galaxies... Star Systems....
                                                                                                            Planetary Systems... Atomic Systems...
                                                                                                                     Subatomic Systems...
______________________________________________________________________________

New Decade... New Energy,
                                               The Observer
                                         

[nueview]

What i want is an explanation of why it is when i put a square wave into a transformer it gives out spikes but when a sign wave goes in it can saturate the core and the wave does not spike on the output instead it just truncates?

to the second part of my question you are partly correct with an answer of hysteresis but if the item is not a contained loop put opened the drag stops and motion frees up. so if motion is determined by open and closed current loops space without matter should not be magnetic is that correct? and if so all gravity would be controled through the hysteresis looping of matter.

i am still confused because photons have no matter so no magnetic sometimes i think and everything people say just doesn't add up at all.

Martin

[The Observer]

Sudo,

When reviewing your video today I SUDDENLY REALIZED that you were using a pickup coil hooked up to the oscilloscope. !

Stupid me... I suppose, just I assumed you would be taking the voltage across the charging coil.
                                      As that what this whole discussion was about.
                                      (note... it was about 5 minutes before bed, when I viewed the video the first time)

I still think you are a pretty smart guy...
                          but you DID NOT do the experiment to confirm that a coil takes 10,000 times longer to charge with a decent  Ferro Core.

The pickup coil may give clues to what the charging coil is doing...but it is not definitive by any stretch.

You may want to try again... otherwise, I guess I need to find a signal generator and metglass so I can give er a try.
                                                I suppose ole Radio Shack probably doesn't have a clue about metglass. ;o/

Regards,
               The Observer

[nueview]

the site usually times out on me so i found a better way to write and get a long responce to some of what i am thinking. there are some thoughts along the way just to keep things straight as to what i will be asking because it can get very confusing along the way and i don't want anyone getting lost.
i am also assuming that most of us are beyond the basic magnetic field theory which is good for children but i have put away childish things and am ready for the more complex answers that are going somewhere.
the term permeability refers to a specific energy field property and its relation to matter by density per volume it does not state or imply anything else about the field or the substance.
then there is the reluctance the ability of the substance to resist change which is how we get magnets.this is what allows me to see the repulsion of magnets which Faraday demonstrated was related to flow direction and spin of the field and no ELECTRONS.
i have struck many an arc and seen evidence of this as electrons in motion usually matter is moved or distorted under these circumstances. i have also energized many iron bars and pulled them apart and never have i seen the slightest inkling of a spark.
so how does the field move this electron?
electrons work great for chemists they put the whole chemistry thing into perspective but they fall apart under real scrutiny of energy fields.some examples from the physicist book include buckey balls which need a lack of gravity to form and exotic elements from nuclear reactions to cold fusion reactors producing anomalous water excess.if one asks a chemist if you can make gold they say no if you ask a physicist he says possibly but we haven't figured that out yet.many times i have been told i do not understand so i study but often i am still left with my questions in tact such as a chemist says there is no alchemy but the periodic table contains elements made in a reactor they are not natural yet this is the basis of alchemy we are taking apart chemical reactions and remaking them with heat pressure magnetic fields and charge state and making oil from the waist in our dumps even as we recycle steel and other metals.
SUDO said that magnetics is a property of dipole manipulation i comprehend this concept then he speaks of current i have seen magnetic fields about electrostatic machines where little current is present we talk about aligning domains fine for matter but in its absence what?
i have been watching the joule thief circuits growing to bigger and bigger toroids using less turns and getting more output this makes sense if the volume of the material is considered and there is low reluctance the power to align domains would be small and the alignment would compound giving a better push back when the domains fall.any increase in output would there fore be tied directly to the total number of domains possible.
a resonant circuit is a single domain yet it passes what energy is not resonant through without interference i was never aware of electrons having two or more non concentric vibration rates so how does this happen?
Thank you very much for reading this it is intended to ask the questions i do not have the answers for but would love the discussion.
Martin