If you understand the fanner principle and the Pseudo Solid Principle and basic magnetics then you should be able to figure out this little jewel.
Thanks Ray,
Butch
It all comes down to power and continuity, the best system self resets and produces continuous power without much inertial trouble. It also surprised me how little people are looking into this concept and variants, the possibilities are almost endless yet there's little to no attention, quite strange. For instance here's yet another concept I came up with while trying to solve the just mentioned problem.
It's only part of a track that could be circular or whatever. The magnet opens up the magnetic pieces, however it's important that the ones behind remain open too, that's why I added the the extra piece below the magnet. In fact this has an extra free advantage, you get the power back from the compressed springs as the magnet and shoe move forward.
Broli,
Any way I could see an animation of your design?
Also, I sometimes wonder if people don't want to accept that something is overunity because if it was they would not have anyting to do the next day?
Butch
Quote from: gammarayburst on August 17, 2011, 12:01:10 AM
Broli,
Any way I could see an animation of your design?
Also, I sometimes wonder if people don't want to accept that something is overunity because if it was they would not have anyting to do the next day?
Butch
It would be quite a pain in the ass to animate that. The concept is not that hard to understand, the magnet in this case move to the right as it does it opens up the steel pieces due to the fanning action. However it's important to leave the ones behind open for a bit longer this way the magnet would be pulled forward to the nearest closed steel pieces. This is done by some piece of plastic or something that runs between the steel pieces and leaves them open. If you don't do this you'll have a symmetry and the magnet will not go forward.
"We found something out doing this same basic configuration. We found that the plastic piece you talk about, well if you replace it with iron it will be pulled in with a strong force if you do it when the magnet is still between the fanned out side bars. We posted it on video but to my amazement no one paid any attention to it. This is so clearly overunity it's not funny. It is the most simple thing, a fifth grader could see it is overunity. I believe that if a self runner was built and put on display that no one would believe it. I believe the only way anyone will believe it is overunity is for it to be announced by a major corporation like General Electric. Short of that I think it will just fade away. I just don't get it, its very strange.
Butch"
Quote from: broli on August 16, 2011, 07:01:12 PM
It all comes down to power and continuity, the best system self resets and produces continuous power without much inertial trouble. It also surprised me how little people are looking into this concept and variants, the possibilities are almost endless yet there's little to no attention, quite strange. For instance here's yet another concept I came up with while trying to solve the just mentioned problem.
It's only part of a track that could be circular or whatever. The magnet opens up the magnetic pieces, however it's important that the ones behind remain open too, that's why I added the the extra piece below the magnet. In fact this has an extra free advantage, you get the power back from the compressed springs as the magnet and shoe move forward.
Good idea! Instead of springs, it could be a weak magnet under it with N and S close to each steel piece which is pulling them together (?)
We know that the "fanning effect" is very weak. Maybe the energy required to separate the pieces as much as we want, also takes the same energy you gain in the forward motion to the right. It often happens to be a relationship between taken and given energy... The design is however quite nice :)
Vidar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgrByr6Matk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygf5xoyWIsI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPqL4zVPrlE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx3QXHkQKqY&NR=1
Quote from: gammarayburst on August 17, 2011, 03:58:21 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgrByr6Matk&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgrByr6Matk&feature=related)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygf5xoyWIsI&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygf5xoyWIsI&feature=related)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPqL4zVPrlE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPqL4zVPrlE)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx3QXHkQKqY&NR=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx3QXHkQKqY&NR=1)
It's sad really. If everyone pitched in his individual skills we would have gotten really far with these mountain of promising ideas.
These video's and animations our group came up with have been lying around for years and no one will pay any attention to something so clearly overunity. I just don't get it.
Butch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kjHa-GPtMM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDBBYvg5YDk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQZay4JAzoQ
I'm going to do a very ballsy thing based on the fanning action. If we take in account all the experiments couldn't we do something as ludicrous as the setup below.
Quote from: gammarayburst on August 17, 2011, 04:40:11 PM
These video's and animations our group came up with have been lying around for years and no one will pay any attention to something so clearly overunity. I just don't get it.
Butch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kjHa-GPtMM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDBBYvg5YDk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQZay4JAzoQ
Do you have working models of the animations?
You are not going to grab peoples attention by producing animations alone.
Quote from: Lakes on August 17, 2011, 06:44:21 PM
Do you have working models of the animations?
You are not going to grab peoples attention by producing animations alone.
This is what's wrong with this place.
"E= mc2 was just letters written on paper.
Can you imagine if Einstein was told, if you don't make a working model no one will pay any attention to it.
Well he didn't make a working model but other smart people saw what was there and made a working model.
I think it was called a nuclear fission device.
Also you have to remember that alot of people lurk this site and never post, but take the information and run to the patent office.
Also, an animation is better that nothing at all or a negative post.
Butch"
Quote from: gammarayburst on August 17, 2011, 09:53:43 PM
"E= mc2 was just letters written on paper.
Can you imagine if Einstein was told, if you don't make a working model no one will pay any attention to it.
Well he didn't make a working model but other smart people saw what was there and made a working model.
I think it was called a nuclear fission device.
Also you have to remember that alot of people lurk this site and never post, but take the information and run to the patent office.
Also, an animation is better that nothing at all or a negative post.
Butch"
Pretty animations are just that, Einstein would have provided the full math on how he arrived at that equation, totally different.
Quote from: broli on August 17, 2011, 06:19:47 PM
I'm going to do a very ballsy thing based on the fanning action. If we take in account all the experiments couldn't we do something as ludicrous as the setup below.
The problem with fanning, is that the fanning is a result of a magnetic path which wants to find its equilibrium. When that is met, the magnetic flux is conducted at its best, given the conditions. So for the design you got, the greater space between the edge of those discs will be more attractive to the magnet than the closer space. This will provide a counter force which will balance the force of the fanning effect itself. So the discs will not start to rotate (If that is the purpose).
If the magnet wasn't more attracted to spaced pieces of metal, the fanning effect wouldn't occour at all. The opposite of fanning effect is the contraction effect which occour angular to the magnetic field which cause the fanning effect. So what happens if you combine those effects. Take one disc slightly higher than the other, so the outer edges cross eachother so one disc is partially over the other, but still inside the magnetic gap?
It's late, and I am just emtying my head so I can go to sleep :)
Vidar
Quote from: Low-Q on August 18, 2011, 04:42:55 PM
The problem with fanning, is that the fanning is a result of a magnetic path which wants to find its equilibrium. When that is met, the magnetic flux is conducted at its best, given the conditions. So for the design you got, the greater space between the edge of those discs will be more attractive to the magnet than the closer space. This will provide a counter force which will balance the force of the fanning effect itself. So the discs will not start to rotate (If that is the purpose).
If the magnet wasn't more attracted to spaced pieces of metal, the fanning effect wouldn't occour at all. The opposite of fanning effect is the contraction effect which occour angular to the magnetic field which cause the fanning effect. So what happens if you combine those effects. Take one disc slightly higher than the other, so the outer edges cross eachother so one disc is partially over the other, but still inside the magnetic gap?
It's late, and I am just emtying my head so I can go to sleep :)
Vidar
Wouldn't the magnet only cause magnetization, ie align the magnet domains. Sure this will cause them to be attracted to the magnet but the net force would perpendicular to the plain of the wheel. I don't see why it would cancel the fanning effect, ie the magnetized iron repelling each other. The big advantage is that it never finds equilibrium as the wheel is pushed new domains are magnetized and demagnetized.
2 quarter pieces can repel each other fine as you can see in the attached video.
But I know it looks too stupid to be true :p.