sorry i'm new
It will stop at the point of lowest energy consumption. The stopping position in your case can easily be seen. Just rotate the main rotor about 10-15° and there you have it: each N-poles of the rotor is between 2 other N-Poles. It will never overcome them.
Even if you change positions of the permanent magnets, it will always find a position where it stops. It's just the way it is.
okay i see the problem. is there a way to shield the magnetic field while the north poles approach each other until the repulsive force points in my desired spinning direction? or at least weaken it so that the repulsive force in my spinning direction is greater then the repulsive force that wants to stop the spinning?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_shielding#Magnetic_shielding
even shielding in your design will not help sorry
Quote from: Ghost on September 09, 2012, 12:57:31 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_shielding#Magnetic_shielding
even shielding in your design will not help sorry
well, from what i have read is that some materials absorb magnetic field lines thus making the magnetic field on the other side of the material weaker or not? isnt that the effect we need to make my design work?
Mu-metal can shield magnetic fields. However this type of setup has been tried by many and has been found to be difficult to achieve rotation. Most will say it's impossible but I think there are some complex configurations that would work. Just my opinion...
Quote from: e2matrix on September 09, 2012, 01:20:57 PM
Mu-metal can shield magnetic fields. However this type of setup has been tried by many and has been found to be difficult to achieve rotation. Most will say it's impossible but I think there are some complex configurations that would work. Just my opinion...
with shielding too? most videos i see on youtube have only magnets but no shielding and the design doesnt seem complex at all.
Sure, mu-metal "shields" magnetic fields. It does so by sucking up all available field lines into itself. In other words... .it is strongly attracted to magnets. This property makes it useless as a shield in any magnet motor design I have ever seen.
What is needed is a magnetic shielding material that is neither attracted to nor repelled by the field it's shielding. Unfortunately at this time, this requires superconducting YBCO type ceramic materials held at temperatures below 70 Kelvin. And even these materials "pin" flux lines rather than simply "shielding", so even though your magnet isn't attracted or repelled, it can be pinned in place, not a good thing for a magnet motor, I think.
i dont see a problem that the mu-metal is attracted. the only job i should do is to weaken the magnetic field (by rerouting field lines through itself) on one side of the magnet while two poles approach each other. look at my second picture where they should be located. when the poles passed each other the full magnetic force is applied because field lines on the other side of the magnet are not affected by the mu-metal.
Quote from: kelloggs on September 09, 2012, 02:47:10 PM
i dont see a problem that the mu-metal is attracted. the only job i should do is to weaken the magnetic field (by rerouting field lines through itself) on one side of the magnet while two poles approach each other. look at my second picture where they should be located. when the poles passed each other the full magnetic force is applied because field lines on the other side of the magnet are not affected by the mu-metal.
I have a suggestion:
In order to correctly analyze the functionality of any magnet motor, imagine in your mind, like magnetic fields (repel) as half of a sphere or a cup shape upside down. (Like half a bubble or "^"). Then for attraction, imagine the opposite fields like the same cup right side up or the inside shape of a bubble. Or a ("V").
Attraction of two magnets will act like one "V" fitting inside the other "V" when locked in attraction. The same magnetic fields will bounce off of one another like two "^"s. But remember, the magnetic fields are 3 dimensional and is more spherical in shape.
Now when you run your motor in your mind, you will see bubble fields hitting each other for repel, and you will see if the cup shape will lock with another cup shape (V within a V). Attract fields will slide past one another a little ways, and then pull back to center the lock position.
If you want a better idea, take two magnets in repel and bring them close to each others fields and you can see how far the field extends by the repel field and what shape it is. To understand attract fields, just imagine the sphere upside down or opposite of a repel field, for both fields.
Hope this helps you with your design.
Liberty
First let me say that it is clear that Kellogs is suffering from latent or suppressed nazi sympathies. His design subconsciously expresses his desire for world domination by the establishment of a superior free energy technology.
lol?
Seriously though, study Johnson's, Kundel's, and Qin Gang's work. It will become clear that they all have something important in common....
Peace,
TS
why cant i modify older posts? i wanted to swap the 2nd picture with a newer one..
the shield should weaken the magnetic field on one hemisphere of the magnet.
hello
as soon the shield of a rotor mag gets close to a stator N, it get attracted by it, to a middle point between the shield and its N pole lines and therefore get stopped.
Remember that mumetal is attracted by ANY pole, even if it has a magnet sticked at the other side.
You may check this:bring close two N poles of two magnets to both sides of a piece of mu,... they will stick !
Regards
Al
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on September 10, 2012, 01:01:31 PM
hello
as soon the shield of a rotor mag gets close to a stator N, it get attracted by it, to a middle point between the shield and its N pole lines and therefore get stopped.
Remember that mumetal is attracted by ANY pole, even if it has a magnet sticked at the other side.
You may check this:bring close two N poles of two magnets to both sides of a piece of mu,... they will stick !
Regards
Al
you mean like this? doesnt seem likely...
i cant wait to test but although i live in a town with ~250.000 people i couldnt find a shop that sells a simple bar magnet.
Hi Kelloggs,
Check a grain store (carries livestock feed). They sometimes carry cow pill magnets.
For reference:
http://www.magnetsource.com/Solutions_Pages/cowmags.html
Put one in a cow and you have perpetual mooo-tion. ;D
combine it with gravity
small update. someone showed me a cool programm called vizimag. it shows field lines and i adjusted my design to it.
how are you planning to drive it?
I don't see any coils or hall effect sensors.
Why need for MU metal? From the descriptions in here this type of metal doesn't seem so special at all. If you put a steel plate with certain width on a magnet pole most of the magnetic strength is absorbed as well, and they are much easier to get. You can try it out yourself by putting a thin iron plate in between 2 magnets (same poles facing the plate). Both magnets will clung to the plate, they're just not attracted that strongly.
the pole faces dont approach each other in my new design. i should change the description on my picture... BUT I CANT! no modify button...
Quote from: gauschor on September 13, 2012, 01:04:25 PM
Why need for MU metal? From the descriptions in here this type of metal doesn't seem so special at all. If you put a steel plate with certain width on a magnet pole most of the magnetic strength is absorbed as well, and they are much easier to get. You can try it out yourself by putting a thin iron plate in between 2 magnets (same poles facing the plate). Both magnets will clung to the plate, they're just not attracted that strongly.
The Difference is Mu-metal will not magnetize as other metals like Iron and steel . The Down side is a magnet is highly attracted to it . That is why you can connect two like pole magnets to it even if you have a High or LOW gauss magnet .The metal ferromagnetic material does not retain a macroscopic internal field after the removal of an external magnetizing field. I think one could get this wheel to work if there is a way to move the mu-metal OR/AND magnet at a precise time an approaching magnet is near that attraction point.The problem is any pole in the moving n or s is attracted to Mu-Metal like another unlike pole magnet .either alone or with another magnet stuck to it.You need to find a metal like Bismuth and aluminium to shield the stationary magnets that don't have that property.Otherwise Mu-metal just acts like another magnet to your rotor magnets no matter what pole they are.What is needed is anti-magnet material and it is only been done in superconducting materials and Star Trek Romulans :)Shields Up!Cloak On!
Gadget
there is another factor which is important: magnetic saturation. every shielding can only soak up certain amounts of field lines. if its full the rest of the field lines will go through thus creating a weaker magnetic field but thats all we want.... i think. approaching the magnets in a rotor/stator alignment with shielding so that repulsion in counter spinning direction is "weaker" until we reach the point where the magnetic forces push in our desired spinning direction. thats the point where we get rid of the shielding. this should only be a matter of precise geometrical assembly of magnets and mu-metal. getting rid of field lines that would block our spinning and let them go when they push in the right direction. there is no breaking the laws of physics here. it's just harnessing whats already there but whats more important is of course: can we get enough energy from the push to make it through the "weak" magnetic field of the next stator so we get the circular motion and even have energy left to spent it somewhere else.
No we can't
because whats already there isn't there at all.
You think it's there but that is your own mistake.
Quote from: ionizer on September 14, 2012, 03:18:42 PM
No we can't
because whats already there isn't there at all.
You think it's there but that is your own mistake.
but then tell me - why do we have to put energy in coils to get the magnetic effect? here we have to do nothing to get the magnetic effect
No thats not true we have to pull the magnets apart and by doing so we put in as much energy.
You should really get somewhat deeper into magnetic fieldlines and the properties of space to get a more complete picture because you dont understand the invisible part.
you also have to pull current-carrying coils apart. the difference is you have to put electric energy in the coil AND mechanical energy to pull them apart. with permanent magnets you only have mechanical energy
No thats not true either.
Go deeper for the real answers.
You are looking at the paddlewheel whilst you should look for the flow of water that makes it turn
the field lines are my water
Fieldlines do not contain energy unless you move them.
And even then they only convert energy frome one form to another
thats why i move the field lines with mu-metal. to bring a difference in the strength of the field line current. thats where the paddlewheel should tap in and start to turn. the paddlewheel is in my case another field line source.
There are no field line sources.
Field lines belong to space just like radiowaves and lightwaves.
The difference is in their frequency.
Radiowaves and lightwaves oscillate.
That is what makes it possible to carry or transfer energy.
The field around a magnet does not oscillate and that is why it does not contain energy.
You might as well start to build a wheel with lightbulbs hoping that when you turn it, it will start to radiate light.
It goes beyond your imagination and that is what makes it so hard.
More needs to be done to earn understanding.
@ ionizer,
we still know too little about the source-dynamics behind magnetism to nail any fundamental postulates about what's possible or not.
So if I were you I would hesitate to unload any such dogmatic crap in the face of people trying to think outside the box.
Remember that all groundbreaking innovations always opposes the contemporary viewpoint of what is possible.
A true scientific mind never say never.
@kelloggs,
First of all, do not be affected by conservative minds trying to impose unfounded negativism. As I pointed out to the conservative ionizer, we know too little about the electromagnetic field to be able to postulate any dogmatic "does not work". The idea of the magnetic field as a conservative field is just as unfounded as the same conclusion of the gravitational field. We really dont know if these are even primary force fields. Maybe they are mere secondary responses to the condition of a single all encompassing field.
We know a lot today how to use the electromagnetic field, but we still don't know what makes a piece of iron attracted to a magnet.
If you want to succeed to pass the so called sticky point apparent in your construct, you have to take several things into consideration. The solution is unfortunately not as easy as merely shielding the magnetic field. You have to deal with certain parameters inherent in the polar interdependence of magnets.
I strongly advice you to keep things as simple as possible from the very start, and a recommended entry in your quest would be to study the field geometry on one single magnet with the properties planned for. Since the magnetic field is three dimensional, you have to study the field by using a three dimensional field detector. This is a quite simple instrument which acts as a three dimensional compass. (When subjected to earths magnetic field, it shows you the correct direction to the poles of the earth, pointing downward at an angle that is depending upon your latitudes.)
Here is one place to buy it: http://www.indigo.com/magnets/magnaprobe-magnetic-field-direction.html (http://www.indigo.com/magnets/magnaprobe-magnetic-field-direction.html)
Use this detector to map the optimal three dimensional shape of your field-reroute configuration needed for you project.
Remember to always minimize the parameters involved in your experiments, and to always document your findings, however small they may look at the time. Such a project as yours is much bigger than you may realize, and calls for just the same accuracy and metric tolrances as in any other engine.Additional parameters such as magnet type, shape and quality and how many magnets are used in the rotor as well as inertia and rpm are vital ingredients,but it all boils down to the configuratioin of the magnetic field vector differential.
I also advice you to make all parts in a non metallic material, since all known metals are interacting with magnetic fields one way or the other.My favorourite choice of material would be the tranparent unbreakable Polycarbonate, which is easy to machine. This way it will be quite easy for you to map the magnetic field geometry and also if you succeed, it will terminate any attempts to discredit the validity of your invention when presenting it to the world.
Theoretically it is fully possible to create a rerouted field shortcut behind a multilayer shield system which makes the unwanted pole hidden from outer field detection, or if preferred, just makes it express a field geometry different from the other pole. There is nothing wrong scientifically with such a theory. But to realize this in practicality is quite another story, calling for an extensive understanding of the field geometry involved in the actual case.
I am myself dedicated to a project quite closely related to your problem, and it all points towards the combination of an insulated multilayer system of conductive and diamagnetic materials, shaped in order to reroute the field exposure of the unwanted pole influence into a loop within a container. This is probably the only way to do it, since any attempts to directly suppress or shield a magnetic field polarity only results in a repositioning of the pole expression.
Don't forget that the north and south field of a magnet always are connected and that the field strength of the poles are interdependent and unseparable.
Have you tried to incorporate materials with diamagnetic properties?
A diamagnetic material when subjected to a magnetic field react by creating an opposing field. This counteracting field is not very strong compared to the field of the magnet acting upon it, but used in combination with the rerouting of magnetic field vectors through conductive multilayers or MU-metal may be the tipping point needed for the creation of a feasible field vector differential.
The most diamagnetic of all known materials is the man made so called pyrolitic graphite. It creates enough counterfield strength to float above a neodynium magnet. But pyrolitic graphite alone will not do the trick even if you use thick layers of this expensive material, since you cannot supress the magnetic field, only work with it.
So if there is a way to create a vector oriented dis-equilibrium in the field strength geometry between the two poles of a magnet, it is bound to be through the geometric redesign of the magnetic field vectors in such a way that the unwanted part of the magnetic field is rerouted through a shortcut into a contained loop.
As I said, this is fully possible seen from the theoretical scientific point of view, and containers that completely keeps out magnetic fields, including the magnetic field of earth, are well known in the scientific community, and employed in research where no electromagnetic interference is allowed. What makes things complicated is when you are attempting to alter the detectable visibility of the nagnetic field polarity.
So don't give up too easy. Just keep in mind that altering the geometry of polarity-visibility is a field of knowledge where you are bound to gain a thorough understanding of the field geometry specific for the case in question. Start by bying one of those cheap three dimensional compasses used for educational purposes, they will suffice well in giving you an initial view of the field orientation.
I also recommend you to gain further insight in the electromagnetic field dimension.
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/MagParticle/Physics/MagneticMatls.htm (http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/MagParticle/Physics/MagneticMatls.htm)
Then the rest is just a lot of trial and error.
Gwandau
Quote from: Gwandau on September 14, 2012, 07:56:35 PM
@ ionizer,
we still know too little about the source-dynamics behind magnetism to nail any fundamental postulates about what's possible or not.
So if I were you I would hesitate to unload any such dogmatic crap in the face of people trying to think outside the box.
Remember that all groundbreaking innovations always opposes the contemporary viewpoint of what is possible.
A true scientific mind never say never.
Actually repeatble tests support this dogmatic crap as you call it.
The problem is that everybody is still thinking inside the 'magic magnets' box if they were thinking outside they would see the bigger picture and finally start to understand how and why.
You should change the 'we' part to something like 'i' know too little about the source-dynamics behind magnetism.
There are people that know more and they usually gained this knowledge by doing multiple tests and comparing results myself included.
I am not sure in which year you got stuck but over here we move on foreward slowly doing tests and gaining more interesting results now and then.
Results that support this dogmatic crap which means there is actual evidence for those who want to know more and that is exactly what we need.
Test results do not lie no matter what you believe.
It seperates fact from fiction.
Trying to think outside of the box, and thinking outside of the box are not the same thing.
They don't even come close to one another.
You think about that.
thats a very strange argument you bring there. what does oscillation have to do with energy production? does water oscillate to produce energy in turbines? does wind oscillate when it blows through rotor blades? does fuel oscillate when you burn it?
if there is a field oscillating or not, there is a energy behind it otherwise it woudnt be there. the properties of lightwaves or radiowaves are not of my concern at this point. what we deal with is a force emitted from an unpowered object (permanent magnet). we call them field lines. they can be made visible through iron chippings. they interact with most metals through attraction but if you have another field line source they can interact with repulsion too. we discovered, that we can reroute field lines through soft metal with high permeability. we know field lines travel from the north to the south hemisphere of a magnet in a specific pattern. we know where the field lines have their highest density thus creating the highest possible force if challenged.
now if we approach a magnet with another magnet (north and south pole parallel arranged so that they repell each other) we experience a force that works against the force we use to bring the two magnets closer. Thats because the field lines of the two magnets start crossing and pushing against each other well because... they just dont like each other. now we try another angel to approach the two magnets but we experience the same force (not only we experience it, it IS the same force). now we try to get past the magnet as close as possible in a circular motion (like in stator/rotor setup). We try it from left, we try it from right but we always need the same amount of energy to get close to the static magnet. that means that the density of the field lines is absolutly equally distributed. now if we push the rotor magnet against his will beyond a certain tipping point which should be somewhere when the 2 magnets are parallel to each other he will suddenly sling in the direction we want to push him. now the field lines worked in our favor and we got some energy back which we used to get him to this tipping point. so what do we think about that? those stupid field lines dont want me to bring my rotor magnet to his tipping point. now we look back at what we have learned about magnetic fields and what we can do. hey, we can reroute field lines of permanent magnets. why dont we rerout field lines that complicate our approach to the tipping point? where there are no field lines that can cross each other there cant be any magnetic forces right? thats what we learned too! we also learned that field lines like to go from north hemisphere to south hermisphere. so why dont we help them out? just give them an easy way so they can get where they want to go until we have reached our tipping point.
QuoteWe know a lot today how to use the electromagnetic field, but we still don't know what makes a piece of iron attracted to a magnet.
maybe the free electrons in the metal get attracted and because they cant escape they lift the metal xD. thats how induction works too somehow.
yeah. the problem with 3D field lines. thats though. the only thing which comes to my mind is lots of mineral oil and iron chippings.
one more thought about the field line rerouting: the shield has to be dimensioned in such a way, that it rerouts the precise amount of field lines available on one hemisphere of the magnet and beeing saturated after that so it wont suck away field lines from the other hemisphere of the magnet.
is there a formular on how much millimeter of soft metal is needed to suck and hold a certain amount of field lines?
Quote from: kelloggs on September 14, 2012, 09:24:21 PM
thats a very strange argument you bring there. what does oscillation have to do with energy production? does water oscillate to produce energy in turbines? does wind oscillate when it blows through rotor blades? does fuel oscillate when you burn it?
if there is a field oscillating or not, there is a energy behind it otherwise it woudnt be there. the properties of lightwaves or radiowaves are not of my concern at this point. what we deal with is a force emitted from an unpowered object (permanent magnet). we call them field lines. they can be made visible through iron chippings. they interact with most metals through attraction but if you have another field line source they can interact with repulsion too. we discovered, that we can reroute field lines through soft metal with high permeability. we know field lines travel from the north to the south hemisphere of a magnet in a specific pattern. we know where the field lines have their highest density thus creating the highest possible force if challenged.
now if we approach a magnet with another magnet (north and south pole parallel arranged so that they repell each other) we experience a force that works against the force we use to bring the two magnets closer. Thats because the field lines of the two magnets start crossing and pushing against each other well because... they just dont like each other. now we try another angel to approach the two magnets but we experience the same force (not only we experience it, it IS the same force). now we try to get past the magnet as close as possible in a circular motion (like in stator/rotor setup). We try it from left, we try it from right but we always need the same amount of energy to get close to the static magnet. that means that the density of the field lines is absolutly equally distributed. now if we push the rotor magnet against his will beyond a certain tipping point which should be somewhere when the 2 magnets are parallel to each other he will suddenly sling in the direction we want to push him. now the field lines worked in our favor and we got some energy back which we used to get him to this tipping point. so what do we think about that? those stupid field lines dont want me to bring my rotor magnet to his tipping point. now we look back at what we have learned about magnetic fields and what we can do. hey, we can reroute field lines of permanent magnets. why dont we rerout field lines that complicate our approach to the tipping point? where there are no field lines that can cross each other there cant be any magnetic forces right? thats what we learned too! we also learned that field lines like to go from north hemisphere to south hermisphere. so why dont we help them out? just give them an easy way so they can get where they want to go until we have reached our tipping point.
Is it strange to see that when you move or oscillate the magnet near a wire you get electric energy and if you just lay it on top nothing happens?
Is it strange to see that induction only occurs when the field lines are moving?
I know the explenation that the mobile electrons do not move when the fieldlines are not moving but don't you like to see or find out more then that?
Radiowaves and lightwaves should be your concern since they are the same field lines but moving.
You can compare this to the strings on a guitar you need to pluck them in order to get sound out of the instrument.
Guitars do not play themselves neither do magnets move by themselves you need to move them in order to see any effect.
Guitars convert kinetic energy into soundwaves.
Coils and magnets can convert electric energy into kinetic enery and vice versa.
But there is more then meets the eye litterally.
You need to turn the generator to get electricity that is conversion between kinetic and electric energy.
A generator basically oscillates a magnet to move the fieldlines which in turn cause induction in the wires that are placed in the field.
A lightbulb converts electric energy into lightwaves which are electromagnetic waves of specific frequency's
The transmitting antenna pluck's the fieldlines that are present througout our universe.
This is why we are able to communicate with the curiosity rover on mars so far away.
These oscillating lines carry energy that induces a signal in the receiving tank circuit.
A static or non moving magnet is at the bottom or DC level of the electromagnetic spectrum.
It does not induce anything nor does it contain any energy.
I don't think it is strange at all.
And once more, tests exist that support these outcomes.
The fact that these magic motors
never work can be concidered as one big clue too.
It's all a matter of perspection and looking at the results.
There is much, much more to be said here but these are the basic things most people are familiar with.
We got rid of the sticky spots many years ago but it is not the solution there still are and have to be other limiting factors.
However,
I was expecting something like which tests or what test results?
There are answers to be found in certain plasma setups, answers to be found in vacuum tube circuits and high voltage circuits,in inductive kickback setups and also in specific types of field line concentrating antenna's, answers in hard X ray generation and secondary emission or the photoelectric effect, in convection current setups where the energy is transferred without the use of metal conductors compared to conventional currents where the valence electrons are the charge carriers, there is a particle velocity difference between them that reveals interesting things not yet described in regular kinematics or any model i have seen so far, even in some regular magnetic setups pulsed at specific frequency's ,all these bit's and pieces point in the same direction, and there are more up to the point of gravitational interaction but that is not my primary direction i concider it a side route.
These are some of the things that go somewhat deeper into the real nature of (electro) magnetic fields.
They provide somewhat different answers and it just might be the missing part of your puzzle or it will make you understand why certain things can or can not work.
It deals with linking things together to see a larger picture.
A whole new world opens up which give rise to undeniable answers, things that will tell you which direction to look.
But there will always be more questions, don't get me wrong.
These test are not as easy as playing with magnets or building motors in the hope that they will magically start to turn without any energy source at hand.
It is not so strange that these tests require more then a set of magnets and these are not practiced by most inside the magic magnetic box thinkers.
Most people are stuck because they do not look any further, trying to work with what they observe neglecting the unseen.
I know a lot of people who build professional designed motors like you there are actually many of them, but i have never seen one work or it was a fake still driven by some external supply.
Once you decide to look further, answers will come to you naturally by discovering things that are new to you and your view on these fields changes each time you learn more.
But there are always things that repeat itself and you can find a pattern which reveals normally hidden hints and makes you think differently.
What if the field from both of your magnets is in reality just one field ?
How would you set up one field against itself to move itself?
While effects are only observed when you put in external energy indicating this very fact?
Do you really think that each antenna has it's own field or do you think all antennas transmit into the same field but at different frequency's?
Some of the answers are right in front of us but most people look around them for whatever reason may be.
Enough for now if you want to know more i could write down some experiments and we can all share some data as i am not much of a talker i like to see real results.
you talk about energy conversion but thats not the goal at all... we want energy gaining through tapping into potential energy sources
i have another example in my mind:
a permanent magnet energized generator like on a bicycle
i have read about those neodym magnets which currently have the strongest magnetic fields. what i have read too is that they come with different magnetic field intensity (labeled with N30-N52 or something like that). now we build two magnets with the same dimensions but different magnetic field intesities and put them into a generator. the magnet with the higher field intensity should produce a higher amount of energy. why? because we didnt change the physical setup. the magnets weigh both the same but the magnet with the higher field intensity has a higher energy potential.
hope to see your device soon.
Quote from: ionizer on September 14, 2012, 08:18:03 PM
Actually repeatble tests support this dogmatic crap as you call it.
The problem is that everybody is still thinking inside the 'magic magnets' box if they were thinking outside they would see the bigger picture and finally start to understand how and why.
You should change the 'we' part to something like 'i' know too little about the source-dynamics behind magnetism.
There are people that know more and they usually gained this knowledge by doing multiple tests and comparing results myself included.
I am not sure in which year you got stuck but over here we move on foreward slowly doing tests and gaining more interesting results now and then.
Results that support this dogmatic crap which means there is actual evidence for those who want to know more and that is exactly what we need.
Test results do not lie no matter what you believe.
It seperates fact from fiction.
Trying to think outside of the box, and thinking outside of the box are not the same thing.
They don't even come close to one another.
You think about that.
ionizer,
your response is totally void of substance and does not mention anything new in the research. And this is of course fully natural since there still are no novel breakthroughs in this area of research. The only one you will fool are yourself.
You are just throwing around a bunch of vague hints that you and "others" knows more than the contemporary frontiers in electromagnetic research. It is certainly not very convincing and clearly shows that you are anything but scientific in your approach.
In the scientific community we need to validate our ideas with repeatable empirical results before being able to even hint at anything within the magnitude of the dynamics behind magnetism.
So if you believe you have found something that novel, and that you possess knowledge about the source dynamics in spite of all the efforts worldwide, please tell us and back it up with documented experiments. Walk your talk, or keep it to yourself instead of dis-spiriting people trying to break new ground. Otherwise your will just look a bit foolish.
And don't even try give me anything about the latest findings of the polarity dependent directional electron-spin detected within the crystal lattice being the cause behind magnetism. It is still just observed symptoms. And if you didn't know, symptoms are mere symptons and are as far from the actual source dynamics as your own self appointed insight in the matter.
The only one that hitherto has come up with a theory about the dynamics behind magnetism is Stephen Hawkings, who has presented a wild guess about magnetism being the result of virtual electrons doing a loop between our universe and a adjacent one, a theory that he was well aware of was a wild one.
Finally, thinking outside the box means just what it says, and implies a healthy disregard for anything inside the box.
To tell anyone what is a "correct" outside the box thinking and what is not is preposterous and unbelievable stupid and only exposes the rigidity and conservatism of someone trapped inside he box.
Really tired of all you self appointed wiseacres in this forum. You are the exact opposite to what this forum stands for.
Go patronize somewhere else with your dis-spiriting unfounded naysaing.
Gwandau
No i can not do that i am sorry.
I suppose you can always get a dog and try to tell him what to do.
I think i just said i could write down some of these experiments.
what else is needed? but look at you.
puh
Quote from: ionizer on September 16, 2012, 04:54:17 AM
No i can not do that i am sorry.
I suppose you can always get a dog and try to tell him what to do.
I think i just said i could write down some of these experiments.
what else is needed? but look at you.
puh
As I said, no substance. LOL
@kelloggs,
the source-dynamics behind the electromagnetic mystery is still a white spot on the map of contemporary physics, and great discoverys await those who finally gain understanding how this force fits into the overall picture of our physical world. So don't believe for a second the unfounded naysayers that are closing in on you the moment you oppose their own ideas.
Harnessing the attractive and repulsive forces of permanent magnets through a correctly arranged dis-equilibrium system is theoretically fully possible. But the field vector arrangement probably has to be quite more complex than the simple setup presented in your drawings. I recommend you to start experimenting with one single magnet and expose it to various interacting materials and conductive multilayer shapes until you get the desired vector differential between the active field vector and the compressed and rerouted one.
As I mentioned before, there are many ways to study the magnetic fields around a permanent magnet, and a simple magnetic field sensor for around 80 dollars will help you map the field vectors around the shielded magnet quite well. http://www.vernier.com/products/sensors/mg-bta/ (http://www.vernier.com/products/sensors/mg-bta/)
Without any field detection instrument I believe you are bound to fail in you quest, since the complexity of an altered field geometry around a permanent magnet most certainly will be challenging.
So first of all, start simple and study the field vectors and the field strength alteration when subjected to different types and shapes of shield alternatives, until you got a fair picture about what kind of field vector shape you want in your configuration. Only then start implementing your ideas. Mere trial end error won't do it, too many parameters are involved here. I'm leaving this thread now, since I don't like the smell of trolls.
I wish you good luck,
Gwandau
Not for you coward.
I can smell your fear.
LOL