STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM

[Airstriker]

That's not a theory.  Power density is nothing more than the ratio between the A received during demagnetization and the energy spent in magnetization.  That came from Zaev.  I believe you need to re-read his articles, because you should have known this if you payed attention.  You probably just skimmed over it real quick if you did read it.

GB

Actually I've read all of them. The main point is - Zaev is using one coil and measuring one coil's magnetisation / demagnetization energy only. Here you have two coils and they have really nothing in common. Actually, the one Naudin is measuring the effect on is an air coil. So it cannot have any effect Zaev is speaking of.

And as for Naudin's 13,7 value you called COP. Let's not call it COP (as it's not it at all) but let's say coefficient of generation (lambda). Also not a perfect name but let it be.

[Airstriker]

Ok now something you all gonna like We've all missed it and I don't really know how it has happened.
Please have a look at JLN's 2SGen Episode 6. Look at the blue curve. Compare the voltage levels of magnetization and demagnetization phase. What do you see? Yes, the magnetization phase voltage level is much higher than the demagnetization phase voltage level. And yes I know the magnetization phase is not rectified but anyway even after it would have been made pure DC it would have had a much higher voltage level.
What is also important at this point is the fact that the demagnetization phase's pulse is wider than the magnetization phase's pulse. We will come back to that fact later.
Now lets move on to Episode 7.
Please have a look at the scope shots. You can see two rectified voltage levels. But hey! Why a hell the demagnetization phase's voltage level is higher than the magnetization phase's voltage level ?! Wasn't that the other way ? Well... In my opinion, JLN simply went to far with thinking about Zaev's theory and confused the voltages! He wanted it the other way that it really is and has not noticed this fact.
Now let's make the answer for two questions:
1) Why is the demagnetization pulse wider than the magnetization pulse ?
2) Why is the demagnetization pulse voltage lower than the magnetization pulse voltage ?

First things first...
1) Magnetic viscosity effect in ferromagnetic core (after demagnetizing the core) does not allow all of the magnet's B-field to "get stuck" in the toroid at once. It takes a while until the toroid's core magnetization level (because of magnetic viscosity effect) becomes NULL. So releasing the magnet's B-field due to toroid's core magnetization will actually be faster than "accumulating" the magnet's B-field during the toroid core's demagnetization phase.
2) The answer for the first question implicates the answer for this one. If the magnetic field change seen from the cylindrical A's point of view is faster during the magnetization phase than during the demagnetization phase, then the EMF induced during the magnetization phase will be higher than the EMF induced during the demagnetization phase - just as we can see in Episode 6.

The funny thing is, that it took me the whole day to think about how is it posiible that it is the way that in fact it's not at all Well now I know.
If you want to prove me wrong, show me the updated scopes and probably I will shut up for some time ;]

[gravityblock]

Now lets move on to Episode 7.
Please have a look at the scope shots. You can see two rectified voltage levels. But hey! Why a hell the demagnetization phase's voltage level is higher than the magnetization phase's voltage level ?! Wasn't that the other way ? Well... In my opinion, JLN simply went to far with thinking about Zaev's theory and confused the voltages! He wanted it the other way that it really is and has not noticed this fact.

The funny thing is, that it took me the whole day to think about how is it posiible that it is the way that in fact it's not at all Well now I know.
If you want to prove me wrong, show me the updated scopes and probably I will shut up for some time ;]

In Episode 7 the yellow trace is the demagnetization trace and the blue trace is the magnetization trace.  In Episode 6 the colors representing each trace were reversed.  So what, that don't mean anything, lol.  In Episode 7 the Yellow trace for Dmag = 37.6v and Blue trace for Mag = -8.4v  Then the voltmeter for Dmag = 35.2v and for the Mag = -9.5v.  The scope traces and the voltmeters are pretty much in agreement with each other.

Are you saying both the scope traces and the voltmeters are wrong?  LOL.  Naudin thinking about Zaev's theory caused him to get the voltages reversed? LOL.  For one thing there is a difference between a theory that has no experimentation to back it and a theory that has experimentation to back it. How can we show you the updated scope shots when there is no updated scope shot or even a need for an updated scope shot?  This is getting really comical and you're really showing your true colors and motivations here.  It's time to get the spray out.

GB

[rice]

@htert2020

i appreciate your thoughtful posts,  i have been there.  i have been a quiet member of this forum for years.  i have built quite a few promising devices that i have seen here and other places online.  i am an electronics engineer,  with an industrial background.  i dont like to type too much so this is all ive got to say.......   if and when we stumble upon an overunity device or motor,  without geting into technical details,  it will quickly be turned into a self runner.  the COP will not be 1.02 or 2.5,  it will be 200 or 1000.  the amount of great minds that are out there that have read thousands of these forums,  and would never post a thing are people like me with a garage full of failed magnet motors and oscilloscopes and boxes of test models.  this is not the real deal.  i am confident.  however i will not waist any more of your time,  as i am not too interested in a debate.  best of luck to you.

[wings]

So now you're saying JLN is wrong ? You really have to decide ;] No offense, I just want us to make a clear view of what is really happening here.

no! no! Naudin is a great man! I just said that in the first diagram there was a wrong label the 10kohm is now corrected 220 ohm.

my analysis is simple input output power and is also simplified