Hilden-Brand Magnet Motor

[jake]

I'm not sure which Flynn site you are referring to.

I was not impressed at all with the flynn "replication" device with the two magnets between the 2 bars, with armatures at each end.  (For more information, look at my posts in that thread.)

I am, however, very impressed with the Flynn whitepaper showing a motor using the "Flynn effect" or whatever you want to call it.  The replication device suffers from a number of problems, especially when trying to apply it to a motor.  The motor implementation as shown in the white paper very elegantly works out the problems, in my opinion.

There is no reason to compare the 'valve' with flynn's replication device.  The replication device is not how Flynn uses his 'idea' in his motor design.  Compare motors to motors, not valve to replication device.

For that matter, I don't know how Jack's motor is arranged, and it may not resemble his diagram at all, and it may work twice as good as Flynn's.  Flynn is very near to the production stage on some of his motors, and Jack is near to independently testing his (I hope).  It will become clear which works the best when all of the results are on the table.

Just trying to make the point that (in my opinion) shorting the flux around the magnet is not making as good of use of flux as the Flynn design, where the flux is at use even with the coil off.  I think the 'valve' could be done in other ways that would put the shunted flux to work somehow.  Just trying to take a good idea and make it better.

[MeggerMan]

Hi Jake,

I have seen the white paper for the Flynn motor now and I think this may be a closer race than I first thought.
Have you got a diagram you can point me to for Jack's design.
I like the way that the field continues around the circumference of the stator, very clever setup.

It will take a bit of drawing to setup the simulation for the Flynn design and I would like to do the same with the Jack's design.
Its a two horse race now, but as long as they both cross the over-unity post then I don't care who wins.

Regards

Rob

[Liberty]

The last I understood, Mr. Flynn's design has a restriction on the magnet strength that can be used in the dual flux design due to coil flux balance within the device and core saturation issues.  Has this changed or been improved?  It appears that Jack's magnetic valve design can deal with any strength magnet.

Additional information is at this web site:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:FPPMT:FAQ#What_is_the_RPM_optimum_of_a_Flynn_PP_Motor.3F

[jake]

Have you got a diagram you can point me to for Jack's design.

http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Director:Hilden-Brand_Electromagnet_Motor
That is about what we know about it.  I assume that his description on the 'valve' is incorporated in the motor, but it may not be fair to assume more than that.  He says there are pms in the rotor too.  I assume pms inside the visible coils, but can't be certain.

The last I understood, Mr. Flynn's design has a restriction on the magnet strength that can be used in the dual flux design due to coil flux balance within the device and core saturation issues.  Has this changed or been improved?

I think that the design shown in the paper would not be restricted in magnet size, but only my guess.  The problem with the replication setup is that the secondary flux generated to steer the second magnet must flow through that magnet, which is already flux rich.  This is one of the glaring problems with the replication device (in my opinion).  I don't think the motor design would suffer the same fate because there is a good iron path for all flux all the time.  If there is saturation, add some iron.

The Flynn design does not have magnets in the rotor, and I don't think it can.  If it has a disadvantage, that might be it.  I think magnets in the rotor would mess up the 'steering' flux and cause the device to not work.  I have a feeling that Jack's motor might have issues with rotor magnets messing with the valves too.  My impression is that Flynn has built 30 or more 'prototypes' and his testing has been much more rigorous and open to scrutiny.  Since Boeing has unquestionably been involved with his motors, there is for sure something unusual going on.

Jack's motors may prove to be even better, but he is a little behind Flynn in the development cycle.  Once he gets some independent testing done we will know exactly what he has.

[energyman8]

Hello everyone, I just thought I would let all know who were interested with GMCC what the latest is. Here is a copy of a post off the Raging Bull message board.


GMC Holding Corp. July 2006 Update

GMC Holding Corp. would like to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of our shareholders for your patience through this challenging period. We would like to assure our investors that we are continuing operations and R&D of the REMAT technology and there is progress with our other holdings. As of this writing the company plans to release these update reports during the last week of each month. These communications will address your most common inquiries received by our Investor Relations representative, Mr. Dan York as well as subjects of interest within our corporate offices. Any questions regarding topics not covered in this address may be directed to Mr. Dan York.

Securities and Exchange Commission

As of July 25, 2006, we are continuing our full cooperation in the ongoing inquiries and requests made by the SEC in understanding the events which have transpired over the past 24 months. At this point, we have no timetable for completion of this process, but we are optimistic with the results from each phase of inquiry. At the request of our legal team, we have been instructed to maintain a neutral position and not release any pertinent information until all questions have been answered and this process has been finalized.

At this time business opportunities and relationships, which were the primary focus of management prior to the SEC suspension of trading, have been placed in a ?holding pattern? until the conclusion of this inquiry. We intend to resume these activities upon conclusion of the SEC inquiry.

Patent Filing

We have received from our patent attorney, the draft of the patent application regarding REMAT. Subject to review by our technical staff, we expect to file this application to the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) by our next company ?Update? (last week August 2006).

Feasibility Research

In June 2006 GMC began researching potential applications of specific need and immediate potential regarding REMAT. This strategic planning effort relates directly to the critical nature of furthering the development of REMAT as well as introducing its benefits to the marketplace. We are perfecting our technology in the electro-magnetic and the magnetic fields of alternative energy. However, due to the discoveries of multiple ancillary successes in this pursuit, GMC has determined we have additional strategies for introducing REMAT into the marketplace.

GMC is also proud to announce the completion of its REMAT mobile demonstration unit. This project was completed this month. Its purpose is for demonstration of the REMAT technology to potential acquisition candidates, joint venture partners, and interested parties in carrying out GMC Holding Corp.?s objectives in alternative energy production.

Other Holdings

GMC has progressed in its strategic planning efforts in the areas of water safety systems and its water purification product line. We anticipate the rollout of this line as soon as possible but no later than the end of 2006. We have established initial interest in multiple markets.

GMC would like to reiterate that we understand and acknowledge other areas of interest from our shareholders. We encourage you to send any questions you may have concerning the status of our company. We would kindly request you make these correspondences via e-mail to our investor relations representative and we will do our best to provide you with as much information as possible.

?I wish to thank you, and I sincerely appreciate your support in our efforts to provide great value for all our shareholders.?

Richard Brace, CEO