The homotenna (homopolar motor + antenna).

[exnihiloest]

I suggest you re investigate how a homopolar motor really works I've addressed this many times. Unlike what the most popular google searches tell you, it's not the spinning disc that causes the torque but the outside brushing circuit. When the disk is attached to the magnet the forces on both cancel out due to newtons third law. However you still have the force interaction between the magnet and outside brushing wire.

This concept attempts to exploit the fact that you can only use that "outside" circuit without a real return path for current. Current goes forward in the single wire circuit and torques the magnet forward, and when it's about to go back the magnet is shielded from the supposed field of the wire which wants to rotate it back.

Even though Lorentz's force is an incomplete concept you can still show that it holds. Use the famous right hand rule and you'll see that the magnetic field either pushes the wire piece up or down depending on current direction. And what do you think the reaction of this force affects? The answer is the magnet, it will be seen as a torque.

A homopolar generator or motor needs a circuit in two parts, one is moving and the other is fixed, acting one on each other. Then we can treat the problem either with classic electromagnetism using Maxwell equations and Lorentz forces or with SR using change of the magnetic field into electric field by Lorentz transforms (or even length contraction of mobile charges in conductors). Both methods give the same result. Forces from the charges in the fixed part of the circuit act onto the charges of the moving part through electric and magnetic fields, and vice versa.

Your explanations in layman's terms with generalities not directly related from an operational viewpoint to your particular case are very confused. For example "Current [...] torques the magnet forward" doesn't mean anything. What are the forces, how are they related to the current, what are the fields: these questions are the right ones and you don't answer them. We see that the magnetic field from the wire circles around the wire, i.e is perpendicular to the magnet field thus it can't produce a torque.

Finally you have just a gif cartoon but neither a working device nor a valid theory and not even the background for explaining classical homopolar devices which are very conventional and not OU. SR, electromagnetism, mechanics (which imply energy conservation) are internally consistent and fully compatible, and you are expecting to prove they are false by using one against another!  I guess you should apply to yourself your advice "investigate how a homopolar motor really works" and then to prove the theory is false by building your miraculous machine, it is so simple.

[spinn_MP]

Hear hear!

Homopolar motors are not an enigma, at least for the last +100 years.

As usual, it's up to the claimant to prove if there's anything extraordinary going on.

Heh, what's this about - "..without a real return path for the current" ... "Lorenz force is an incomplete concept"...

So, if some of us disagree,  we should investigate further?
Nice.

[WilbyInebriated]

As usual, it's up to the claimant to prove if there's anything extraordinary going on.

from nizkor.org, logical fallacy: burden of proof

In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate.

now spinner, how is it that you come to the conclusion that your claim (side) is the one assumed to be true?

[spinn_MP]

from nizkor.org
now spinner, how is it that you come to the conclusion that your claim (side) is the one assumed to be true?

Use some logic, and you'll find out for yourself.
It's quite different if the "opponent" sides (e.g. politicians) are balancing their opinions against current situation, than if a few geniuses provoke billions of man-hours of qualified research and gathered knowledge. Understood, tested,.. history.., COMPLETELY backed up with theory and math.


Now, what's your point, providing that link? You have your own opinion? That's good.
Sure, either "side" could be correct, after all. No problems with that.

Except, some kind of a verifiable proof is needed, after all.

At the moment it seems that the current position (knowledge, science) still holds..?

[WilbyInebriated]

Use some logic, and you'll find out for yourself.
It's quite different if the "opponent" sides (e.g. politicians) are balancing their opinions against current situation, than if a few geniuses provoke billions of man-hours of qualified research and gathered knowledge. Understood, tested,.. history.., COMPLETELY backed up with theory and math.

theories are just that. THEORIES and math is just MATH... neither is evidence that your claim is the one assumed to be true.

Now, what's your point, providing that link? You have your own opinion? That's good.
Sure, either "side" could be correct, after all. No problems with that.

Except, some kind of a verifiable proof is needed, after all.

At the moment it seems that the current position (knowledge, science) still holds..?

what's my point? use some logic and you'll find out for yourself.
my point is you have nothing that supports your claim that burden of proof is on broli...

yes, a verifiable proof that your claim is correct is needed.

at the moment, the current position is based upon theories... at least according to what you have claimed here in this thread.