The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity

[gravityblock]

According to wikipedia:

"Magnetic pole model: Although for many purposes it is convenient to think of a magnet as having distinct north and south magnetic poles, the concept of poles should not be taken literally: it is merely a way of referring to the two different ends of a magnet. The magnet does not have distinct "north" or "south" particles on opposing sides."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet

I had come to this conclusion on my own and the wikipedia article suggests this also (although I realize wikipedia is not always correct). This is total confusion to what is taught and what really is.

Let's analyze the flow of current:

On the topside of the loop, the current is flowing from left to right or from west to east. On the bottom side of the loop, the current is flowing from right to left or from east to west. So, according to the above circuit, the flow of current is changing direction or polarity. This is not correct. The current flow is still moving in the same direction relative to the topside and bottom side of the loop and has the same polarity. I think most of us will agree with this.

It is the same in a magnet. The magnetic field doesn't have a north or south pole. The magnetic field is still moving in the same direction regardless of what side it is flowing from or flowing to. If the North pole side has a clockwise spin, then the South pole side will have a counter-clockwise spin relative to each other. Although the spins are different relative to each other, the magnetic field is still moving in the same direction and have the same polarity. The spin will determine which direction the magnetic field of flux will flow from or flow to relative to each other.

The conclusion is it may be convenient to refer to a magnet as having a north and a south pole, we must realize this only refers to the different ends of the magnet and does not mean a magnet's north pole side has a different polarity than the south pole side.

This is total confusion to what is taught and what really is.

I truly hope I am not the author of confusion here. Please correct me if I am wrong, cause I am wrong more than right.

[CARN0T]

Hello, Gravityb,

I found your thoughts to be very interesting.  I am reminded that an electric dipole does have two charge centers spaced apart.  And, as you say, a magnetic dipole does not.

Funny, that on the outside, an electric dipole and a magnetic dipole have exactly the same type of field properties.  But on the inside, they are entirely different.

Ernie Rogers

According to wikipedia:

"Magnetic pole model: Although for many purposes it is convenient to think of a magnet as having distinct north and south magnetic poles, the concept of poles should not be taken literally: it is merely a way of referring to the two different ends of a magnet. The magnet does not have distinct "north" or "south" particles on opposing sides."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet

I had come to this conclusion on my own and the wikipedia article suggests this also
----<SNIP>----
I truly hope I am not the author of confusion here. Please correct me if I am wrong, cause I am wrong more than right.

[gravityblock]

Hello, Gravityb,

I found your thoughts to be very interesting.  I am reminded that an electric dipole does have two charge centers spaced apart.  And, as you say, a magnetic dipole does not.

Funny, that on the outside, an electric dipole and a magnetic dipole have exactly the same type of field properties.  But on the inside, they are entirely different.

Ernie Rogers

They are only different on the inside in regards to each other because we're not doing it right. Do it right and they'll be the same on the inside and outside.

When you create an electric field from a magnetic field, then the electric field will have a counter emf to the magnetic field that created it because they are not relative to each other, meaning no perpetual state of movement between their infinities.

Another way to say this, is the north and south poles have a field that are relative to one another, thus they are not in opposition to each other, meaning they are in a perpetual state of movement within their own infinity.

It is the same way with an electric field. The negative and positive sides are not in opposition to each other. The field is moving in the same directions relative to each other, meaning they are in a perpetual state of movement within their own infinity. (Whaaaaaaaaaaaat)

Because the electric field was created from the magnetic field and the two fields are not relative to each other, this breaks the perpetual state of movement between the two different infinities.

Create an electric field that is not in opposition to the induced magnetic field that created it, then we can have overunity because their will be a perpetual state of movement between both infinities (the two infinities will become one).

This is what broli and I are working on. We believe it is possible to have a stationary coil to rotate the magnets where the magnet is rotating on its magnetic axis so that the magnetic field doesn't change.

Since the magnetic field doesn't change, then there is no counter emf. No counter emf means Lenz's law does not apply.

Remember it is the spin of the electrons orientated in the same direction as not to oppose each other that creates a permanent magnetic field in a permanent magnet. Since the electrons can do this, we can do this also. We are doing it now, but doing it wrong.

We make a coil of wire that aligns more of the electrons in the coil of wire to have the same spin similar to a permanent magnet, but then we use a magnet in the wrong way to create another emf field that opposes the spin of the electrons (this is stupidity if you really think about it. This is not the way the electrons are doing it in a permanent magnet....LOL).

Why would we create a coil that aligns more of the electrons in the coil to have the same spin and then later oppose this spin by using the magnet wrong? When we decide to do it right and use the permanent magnet so it can rotate on its magnetic axis or another method so it doesn't create a counter emf, then we'll have a permanent magnetic motor similar to a permanent magnet and have overunity. Don't say we can't do this because the electrons in a magnet are doing it right. Why can't we? We can do it right once we forget everything we've been taught about conversion of energy.

Please note I may not be using the term relative in its proper terms, but you should get the idea if you study this.

Oh, I apologize for being repetitive in what I'm saying. I am doing this so it will stick in your mind. I'm trying to undo all the years of being brainwashed with wrong theories and concepts. If you don't think this theory is right, then you can ignore it. Hopefully this theory can be proven to be correct, then you will have to accept it and will be happy that it is correct.

[gravityblock]

A brief side note on the term of overunity:

I have used this term in previous posts. I want to clear this up before someone throws the conservation of energy and other laws at me.

When I have used this term, I am referring to an unlimited amount of energy for output that is available to us in the system.

Let's say the system has 100 units of energy available for output. This means we can't use more than 100 units of energy continuously or at any given time.  This does mean we can use 100 units (minus heat losses, etc.) of energy continuously. The important thing to remember is the heat losses and other losses does not lower the amount of energy in the system. It only lowers the amount of energy that is available to the system.

When you have an overunity motor then the total amount of energy that is available to you at any given time is the total amount of energy available in the system. The total amount of energy in the system will always be available to the system for output but not more than that at any given time. This does not break the conservation of energy or any other known and well established laws.

How do we make more energy available to the system at any given time:

1) More turns of wire in the coil.
2) Make the core bigger with the right materials.
2) Bigger and stronger permanent magnets.
3) Using materials that have the highest magnetic permeability known, etc.

I think you get the idea.

[CARN0T]

They are only different on the inside in regards to each other because we're not doing it right. Do it right and they'll be the same on the inside and outside.

Would you care to illustrate your point using the HF molecule, which has a strong electric dipole moment?

Ernie Rogers