Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4sapBLNMoM
God Bless,
Jason O
Very interesting, seems that the red and black wires are in a sort of elongated bifilar/cadaceus coil setup!
Perhaps this allows for not net induction, and hence no back torque(or very litte) against the moving rotor with the two small Neodynium magnets on it??
These red and black wires, the way they are wired could induce scalar-type of effect which could then be charging the large cap.
THese wires are also in a setup directly reminicent of Hooper's motional E Field, which has MANY of the same attributes that scalar emissions have...http://rexresearch.com/hooper/hooper1.htm
In addition, the gentleman who made the video talks about how attaching a pully or anythig to the rotor doesn't work as the rotor stops, that is easy to see why, but I don't see why the unit can't be upsized and used as a generator of energy, and that overunity energy can be used to power a simple DC motor that does these pully actions that he would want. The point is, not every generator is also a motor!!!
This is VERY important people...It is SO much more then a simple pickup coil, magnet, solenoid setup! AND the KEY to this setup lies in that red/black twisted pickup coil!!!
Hi all ,
I got sent this video in response to a video i posted on YOU tube. Is this what we have all been looking for? Not perpetual motion but not far away from it. I am sure you will all be impressed by the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4sapBLNMoM
Enjoy
Craigy
Wow,
finally a new motor that works on pure magnetism and
and some wires !
I think this could easily by scaled up to produce more power.
Does he use any transistor to switch a current pulse
to the big lower coil ?
Is is talking about a Reed Switch inside the big coil...
Is the red and black wire shorted at the top ?
probably yes, cause it must generate a voltage and current
and charge the first big electrolyte capacitor...
Very neat.
How can we download this video from Youtube and
store it over here, so that it is not lost, if Youtube would
delete it ?
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
use vdownloader
http://www.enriquepuertas.com/wp-content/files/Vdownloader03alfa.zip
stanis
I wonder, has anyone got a Bedini School Girl Motor they could convert?
Craigy
There must be other components other than those displayed for it to function. At the very least a diode somewhere to stop discharge of the capacitor immediately the magnet stops inducing an emf in the twisted wires.
Probably a diode before the big electrolyte capacitor.
he also speaks of a reed switch inside or near the big coil
to pulse the stored charge of the capoacitors onto the big coil.
Hmm,
the trick must be the red-black spiraling wire not dragging down the movement
of the magnets, while it induces current into the caps !
It seems, the rotating magnet cuts the field only at 90 degrees or the spiral
design has an effect not to drag down the motion of the magnet...
Hmm... very clever..
Hi All ,
I have emailed him via YOUTUBE and pointed him in the direction of Overunity.com hopefully he will answer our questions and join the group.
Craig
Hi,
can somebody see my comments under the video
on youtube ?
I can not see my own posted comments...
Did he disable comments or why is this ?
I did log into youtube and I can post comments,
but I can not see my own comments...
Hmm...
hi, i'm eltimple on youtube , i can only see my comments so far. maybe the server is taking its time updating...
If you look at the start of the video carefully you can see that there is no link between the red and black wires. if this set up manages to charge the capacitor it is totally beyond my electrical knowledge and i suspect everyone elses. As we say here in Scotland - 'I hae ma doots' ( trans. I have a notion the device is being misrepresented)
Jdo300, nice find, very interesting. Thx
The wires are not connected on the top, open dipole.
tao yes nice observation.. , magnetic flux is moving along the general axis of the wires and it's not "cutting their plane". agreed on the scalar possibility.
Thanks for the hooper link.
I wonder if the magnet moving over the charged capacitor is an essential part of the design?...
There is a moving magnetic field moving through an electrostatic field there just before the reed switch discharges the cap over the coil.
Nice
Quote from: Craigy on November 20, 2006, 10:35:06 AM
Hi all ,
I got sent this video in response to a video i posted on YOU tube. Is this what we have all been looking for? Not perpetual motion but not far away from it. I am sure you will all be impressed by the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4sapBLNMoM
Enjoy
Craigy
Ooops duplicate thread it seems. Just saw it's the same as here, (thanks again), some interesting comments http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1720.new.html#new
It would be great if we get the builder to join and provide some more solid info, on the components used etc.
Hi Craigy,
did your comment made under:
eltimple
show up instantly on youtube
or did it take a while ?
My comments just don?t show up...
Hmm.
Could you please post a comment,
that the discussion about this motor is here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1722.0.html
and that it would be great, if the inventor would
post a schematic diagram and tell us, if the red-black spiral
coil is shorted at the top ?
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Hi there ,
your comment has just appeared, the server must up date slowly when traffic is high, anyway i emailed your request direct to him..
i think there is no connection, as per the explaination on the other thread i quote Tao
"These red and black wires, the way they are wired could induce scalar-type of effect which could then be charging the large cap.
THese wires are also in a setup directly reminicent of Hooper's motional E Field, which has MANY of the same attributes that scalar emissions have...http://rexresearch.com/hooper/hooper1.htm
In addition, the gentleman who made the video talks about how attaching a pully or anythig to the rotor doesn't work as the rotor stops, that is easy to see why, but I don't see why the unit can't be upsized and used as a generator of energy, and that overunity energy can be used to power a simple DC motor that does these pully actions that he would want. The point is, not every generator is also a motor!!!
This is VERY important people...It is SO much more then a simple pickup coil, magnet, solenoid setup! AND the KEY to this setup lies in that red/black twisted pickup coil!!!""""
Craig
Hey,
Great observations about the open-eneded coil Tao, I never would've noticed that! This must be some kind of one-wire potential thing (scalar as others noted). It's a shame that this guy hasn't thought about scaling it up to a larger device. We should build one!
By the way, here's some more food for thought in case it helps anybody :-).
God Bless,
Jason O
Now the inventor posted the following on youtube:
"If the pickup coil were any longer, the induced current causes too much drag and the machine stops. The caps are not pre charged before the demonstration. The motor runs for days at a time. There is no rectifer diode before the reservoir cap as the induced voltage is DC ."
It is very interesting, that the induced voltage is DC,
so it seems the red and black wire are really not connected at the top
otherwise the cap would discharge !
So he seems to induce voltage in on open ended
transmission line style coil !
worth a try me thinks, and it won't break the bank either
Craig
I am not at home right now and
don?t have a magnet and my scope here.
Could somebody please spiral wound 2 wires
with open end and connect a scope and
post a scope shot , how a magnet induces voltage onto it,
when you move a magnet like this motor does in this video ?
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
If you look at the vid closely, you'll see the rotor slowing down each time he gives it a push.
@Jason
Thanks for the great link. @All, don't forget that Jason was the first to alert us about the Torbay motor.
NdFeb magnets on the rotor ends, made of pvc, styrofoam, a brass rod, rubber stops, and nylon spacers...
We need to contact this guy, anyone with a youtube account?, guess I could just make one ;p.
TAO, so it comes to a stop?
Quote from: FreeEnergy on November 20, 2006, 11:28:37 PM
TAO, so it comes to a stop?
Well, I think I need to redo the pickup twisted wires, they seem to have some conduction issues reaching the cap...That might be why the cap wasn't charging...
Plus, I don't have the solenoid that pulses the rotor in there, but I don't need that right now.
I am basically FIRST testing how it is possible to charge an electrolytic cap by moving a magnet PARALLEL to two conductors that are twisted together!!! According to Physics, the cap shouldn't charge...
Tao, does it make any difference which way the wires are twisted relative to the magnet motion, and the capacitor polarity?
Thx.
Quote from: mikestocks2006 on November 21, 2006, 12:29:10 AM
Tao, does it make any difference which way the wires are twisted relative to the magnet motion, and the capacitor polarity?
Thx.
That is a good question, I would think that it would matter!
Like perhaps for a clockwise twist, the magnet should be south pole outward, or north pole outward.
I will test this later and with better wire, after I hear from the inventor, I mailed him........
Hi Tao,
Great looking model there! I like the styrofoam approach!
I'll be interested to see what the inventor says to you. I wonder where he got the idea to use the twisted wire?
God Bless,
Jason O
Yes it does look as though this inventor has found some sort of effect but probably not due to any emf induced in the twisted wires. By far the greatest emf generated by the system is that as the magnet passes over the solenoid. If it does work choice of components and some sort of transmission line effect are the most likely reason.
Found some information on what those twisted wires could be doing........Remember, twisting wires together allows for a NO-NET INDUCTION CONDITION, this is why the wires in cat5 cables are twisted pair! Also, moving a magnet PARALLEL and ALONG a conductor WON'T induce a voltage/current....So SOMETHING WEIRD is going on....Let's figure it out...
...GIMMICKS...
In electronics
Two wires touching, not connected, possibly twisted together several times, provide a capacitor of very few picofarads as capacitive coupling. This, quite unofficially, is called a gimmick too.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shol.com%2Fkuggie%2Fcttip%2Fpix%2Fgimmic.jpg&hash=ba644befb3eae0b573b87d21aa5cc0eb7d75a876)
And this was ripped from http://web.telia.com/~u85920178/begin/gimmik-0.htm:
Projects such as my VFH FM Wireless Microphone (BUG) and other VHF projects, use small value
capacitors, under 15pf. Wouldn't it be nice if you could make small value capacitors to order
for the job at hand? But suppose for tuning (the BUG?) you needed a capacitor between, say, 12pf
and 15pf to put the transmitter between those two strong stations! No problem. Take a bit of
single-strand plastic covered hook-up wire about 15cm long (15pf) and fold it
in half, crossing the ends. Hold the loop so formed with a pair of plyers and begin twisting:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.telia.com%2F%7Eu85920178%2Fbegin%2Fgimmic1.jpg&hash=51efe80a9f2f1c2016352ab975d616b3fc1cc673)
Continue twisting tightly until the twisted section begins to curl. Now cut off the loop so
that the top is no-longer short circuited. Strip the ends and you have a perfect vow-value,
high-voltage capacitor of about 15pf - 20pf.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.telia.com%2F%7Eu85920178%2Fbegin%2Fgimmic2.jpg&hash=571142d6c8a2b246a49dc4a18a5766d2827b9a23)
Too many pico-farads? Cut it down to size. I have cut this one down to about 5pf for my latest
project; a VHF FM crystal/controlled transmitter for packet radio using four of these capacitors. I'll
bet you that Tandy would pot them and charge you the earth - if ony they knew how.
Cut off too much and the capacitance is a bit too small? Twist it tighter or roll it up into a
ball - Dead easy! In this way you can also make yourself a preset tuneable capacitor. Let Tandy
try to pot that!
Have fun and "lets twist again" in the 90's, de HARRY, Upplands Vasby, Sweden.
So, basically, this inventor guy is moving a magnet OVER a SMALL capacitor, which is this GIMMICK thing, and this action then CHARGES a larger electrolytic capcacitor........... WA WA WA WHAT?
Poynting flow anyone???
From here: http://www.cheniere.org/misc/static%20poynting%20gen.htm
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cheniere.org%2Fimages%2FEnergy%2FStaticGensm.jpg&hash=ae4fedad6874101045dbac64934f73b923ae7440)
A Simple, Cheap Free Energy Generator -- But How Do You Collect and Use the Energy?
Let us make very clear that extracting energy from the vacuum is very easy. We will use a device which can be built for a dollar.
Take a charged capacitor, and lay it on top of a permanent magnet so that the E-field of the capacitor is at right angles to the H-field of the magnet. Then the standard Poynting flow S is given by S = ExH, which in this case is maximized for a 90-degree angle between E and H. In fact, the magnitude S of S is just the product of the two magnitudes E and H. The direction of S is at right angles to both E and H, and given by the usual right hand rule.
Well, even by orthodox theory, that is an actual Poynting energy generator. It just sits there and pours out free energy, directly extracting it from the vacuum. There are two dipoles -- one electrical and one magnetic -- continuously serving as an asymmetry in the fierce vacuum flux. Once you pay to make the permanent magnet and charge the capacitor (or use an electret), that simple gadget will extract energy from the vacuum and pour it out indefinitely.
This illustrates how easy it is to extract energy from the vacuum. However, it comes out in nondivergent or difficult-to-use form. So the problem is to intercept and divert a substantial portion of it, or convert a substantial portion of it into a usable form.
That is the problem that the DOE should be working on, with maximum effort.
Quote from: tao on November 20, 2006, 11:57:22 PM
Quote from: FreeEnergy on November 20, 2006, 11:28:37 PM
TAO, so it comes to a stop?
Well, I think I need to redo the pickup twisted wires, they seem to have some conduction issues reaching the cap...That might be why the cap wasn't charging...
Plus, I don't have the solenoid that pulses the rotor in there, but I don't need that right now.
I am basically FIRST testing how it is possible to charge an electrolytic cap by moving a magnet PARALLEL to two conductors that are twisted together!!! According to Physics, the cap shouldn't charge...
Tao,
please try first without the cap and see,
if you get a positive pulse induced into the wire and please
post a scope shot,
if you have a scope.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
P.S: I have merged the 2 topics now into one.
Hello all,
just now I have made the following test:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schmalenbach.de%2Fsarah%2Ftest.jpg&hash=af33a59b390dc1cbb193c54d8cb06bc6788af72f)
If I move the strong magnet very quickly along the not connected twisted wires, I only can produce a voltage of 0.1 millivolt (0.1 mV).
If I connect the ends of the wires, the current is only 0.5 mikroampere (0.5 ?A / the half of a millionth ampere).
That's not enough to load the capacitance and to drive the rotor.
I believe that the engine is a fake.
I'm also astonished that in the beginning of the video within the title is written "Preputal" instead of "Perpetual".
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach, Germany
(Electronics Engineer)
Quote from: hartiberlin on November 21, 2006, 09:43:55 AM
Regards, Stefan.
P.S: I have merged the 2 topics now into one.
Stefan, thanks
Could you please add some safeguards, so we don't lose whole posts as in some other threads. There is valuable info and references posted here.
Thanks
Quote from: peter_schmalenbach on November 21, 2006, 11:02:12 AM
Hello all,
just now I have made the following test:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schmalenbach.de%2Fsarah%2Ftest.jpg&hash=af33a59b390dc1cbb193c54d8cb06bc6788af72f)
If I move the strong magnet very quickly along the not connected twisted wires, I only can produce a voltage of 0.1 millivolt (0.1 mV).
If I connect the ends of the wires, the current is only 0.5 mikroampere (0.5 ?A / the half of a millionth ampere).
That's not enough to load the capacitance and to drive the rotor.
I believe that the engine is a fake.
I'm also astonished that in the beginning of the video within the title is written "Prepetual" instead of "Perpetual".
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach, Germany
(Electronics Engineer)
There is another question that needs to be asked:
How much energy is required to keep the rotor going?
From the video and the description, it appears to be very well balanced, good inertia distribution, towards the outer perimeter (magnet region), low weight and extremely low friction, he mentions teflon bearings, lubrication etc.
Are millivotls and fractions of milliamps enough to keep it going?
He also mentions that he could not put any additional load on it.
I can't tell if it's workable or not, just posting some thoughts that may help.
Maybe the wire is to just mislead you.
You notice the Magnet on the arm is passing over the Big Capacitor. Anyone popped a meter on a Capacitor and seen if it charges when a magnet is passed over the top?
Regards
Sean.
Quote from: CLaNZeR on November 21, 2006, 01:01:47 PM
Maybe the wire is to just mislead you.
You notice the Magnet on the arm is passing over the Big Capacitor. Anyone popped a meter on a Capacitor and seen if it charges when a magnet is passed over the top?
Regards
Sean.
Nice!. I had the exact same thought earlier posted on page 2.
"I wonder if the magnet moving over the charged capacitor is an essential part of the design?...
There is a moving magnetic field moving through an electrostatic field there just before the reed switch discharges the cap over the coil."
Nice to see more members making simmilar observations. Thanks
!
I see so many questions with this design that I do not understand. Some have already been discussed in this forum, such as the twisted pair.
Let's look at the other end, the small cap and the resistor. These are the only connection to the solenoid coil. That resistor has a value I could not read, perhaps someone else can. The solenoid seems to be substantially wound, and will therefore have some resistance. The resistance value of the resistor must be lower than the coil or any charge from the large capacitor would quickly drain through the coil.
The charge from the twisted pair has been shown to be miniscule. I suspect a far larger voltage and current from the magnet passing the large coil. This charge will have a polarity and will therefore probably load the small capacitor, possibly even leaking a charge through the resistor to the large capacitor.
As the magnet approaches the coil it should be in attract mode and the small charge in the small capacitor will rapidly dissipate. Then the passing of the magnet over the coil should induce a charge that might kick the magnet away.
The twisted wire appears to be just for show.
BTW, there are many systems that draw energy from the environment and depend on highly efficient devices. Some "anniversary" clocks operate on variations in air pressure. Other similar devices operate on diurnal temperature changes, or even humidity changes. I once saw a motor, I believe in Popular Science, or perhaps Popular Mechanics, that ran on the potential of a wire suspended from a high flying helium balloon. If these mechanisms are concealed the device could be thought of as perpetual motion. Who knows what might be hidden in this Mervace motor. Time will tell as more information becomes available.
I have encouraged Mervace to loan his device to Sterling Allen or J. L. Naudin for independent research and confirmation. His current failure to reply to my request or those of others for circuit diagrams and parts specifications causes me a little suspicion.
If this is for real then that Cap is getting charged from somewhere to energize the coil to repel the permanent magnet on the revolving Rod.
How that Cap is getting charged is the question?.
Notice how the small cap is angled again in line with the spinning rod at an angle, if it is a Cap?.
Is that a Resistor going to the small Cap or a Choke of some sort?
Why use a resistor in series? what would that gain apart from restricting the current?
Is the coil charging the big Capacitor and then the small capacitor is not a Capacitor but a electro magnet that then repels the rod from the power held in the big Capacitor feeding the coil?
Seems a huge coil to repel a small permanent magnet and also the coil seems on a commercial mount, not a homemade mounting, reminds me of a LNB.
Good food for thought though!!!
Regards
Sean.
Hmm,
I just tested with my analog multimeter,
if a spiral cable will induce anything as shown,
but my lowest scale on DC voltage has
0.15 Volts full scale,
but there is not even a small movement,
when I waive my strong Neodymn magnets
across the spiral wire.
ALso I tested several caps, if there is any voltage generated at them,
if I waive the Neo magnet across it.
ALso no voltage to see....
So I wonder, if this device is a fake ?
He also did not post any followups...
Yeasterdays reply of the inventor was also deleted , hmm, by him ?
Maybe he has just a hidden 1.5 Volt Battery inside the electrolyte cap case ?
Hmm,
also no new replies from the inventor.
He seems to censor also my other posted comments with this forum link
and my other questions I had tried to post in the comments section there at youtube.
Youtube says, that the comment was posted, but it never showed up.
Maybe some other members can also try to post comments there and see,
if they go through and post the URL to this thread over here,
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Hi All he has posted a reply on you tube..i quote...
A detailed explaination video is coming if requested. Good link to W.J.Hoopers work. My machine is quite efficent, 5.25mWs does the trick. Best comment so far from Smarthousesys (I hae ma doots)Skepticism is healthy.Free energy is elusive,Perhaps impossible.Its good to see new ideas & approachs which I did not consider 15yrs ago. Delivering such a small amount of energy to my machine proved very difficult to say the least... but at the time (failure was not an option).Its not battery operated.
Craig
Could the twisted upright wires have a steel wire core in with the copper?
Quote from: Rod on November 21, 2006, 07:39:07 PM
Could the twisted upright wires have a steel wire core in with the copper?
Well, I now also did this test with
1. one iron wire and one copper wire
2. 2 iron wires
but the result is the same, that is not any voltage generated at all,
at least not in the usable range..
It seems to be less than 1 millivolt, if there is induction at all..
So the only thing could be that the big coil in the center would
somehow pickup the induction of the rotating magnets and store it into
the caps and this way somehow keep the rotation going...
which makes no sense to me..
and then the twisted pair coil would be obsolete....
hmm...
The lack of communication and the non acceptance of comments
at the youtube page makes me wonder, if it really is not a fake.
Did anybody try to post the exact URL of this forum page there
as a comment ?
Please try it yourself and see, if your comments go through..
Unfortunately my last comments are always blocked...
Maybe the reed switch has something to do with it - also, don't know if it's significant or not, when he rotated the rotor the other way it immediately hung up over the solenoid core so maybe the field has to pass over the big 1000uF cap (a la Poynting) for the effect to work. Any ideas?
Hello all,
I have found the solution!
The device in the video is a simple (but very good adjusted) "Adams - Motor".
The inventor is a Mr. Robert Adams (but it is not the man in the video). Mr. Adams had invented this device and similar variations about 25 years ago.
You can find all informations (plans, descriptions, pictures) here:
http://www.melog.ch/adams (http://www.melog.ch/adams)
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=Motor+Robert+Adams&meta= (http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=Motor+Robert+Adams&meta=)
http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/drrobertadams (http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/drrobertadams)
It is a very good thing.
When a permanent magnet passes the core of the big electromagnet, the permanent magnet induces a magnetic field in the coil. Then the reed - contact shorts the coil (short-circuit). The now flowing current gives a kick to the permanent magnet in the right polarity and the rotor continues its rotation (also using the inertia of the permanent magnets in the right moment).
The trick is the collapsing field of the big coil.
The little cap and the resistor are only there to avoid sparks into the reed - contact.
The big cap improves the function (collecting the rest - current of the coil when the reed - contact is off (open)? / plan (circuit) necessary).
Unknown is not yet the function of the twisted wires.
In the Links above is written, that Mr. Adams long time had hidden his invention, because the government and the industry had warned him not to publish it. He has survived an attempt on his life by an individual affiliated with the New Zealand Secret Intelligence Service and the Central Intelligence Agency, direct suppression of his invention by former (and recently deceased) Prime Minister of New Zealand, Robert Muldoon, the giant British electronics company, Lucus Industries, as well as numerous other insurmountable difficulties that have been placed in his path. All because his invention worked.
Now a new time is beginning (dawn). The Perpetuum Mobile is born.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schmalenbach.de%2Fsarah%2Fadams.gif&hash=796fcc57b5faf85b281e314990612b27d17df68a) This is an other version only (same principle).
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach, Germany
http://www.schmalenbach.de/patent (http://www.schmalenbach.de/patent)
I am eager to see Tao come back with his replication including a solenoid and the resistor. From examining a frame by frame of the video the capacitor appears to be a 220mfd.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fadzoe.8m.com%2FBig%2520Cap%2520and%2520resistor.jpg&hash=5b5494e606a8577f45ff071c7c42eb981c88d885)
Perhaps someone can identify this capacitor and resistor for certain.
Tao's replication has the problem of excessive drag on the rotor due to the large cross section.
Quote from: peter_schmalenbach on November 22, 2006, 04:19:44 PM
Hello all,
I have found the solution!
The device in the video is a simple (but very good adjusted) "Adams - Motor".
The inventor is a Mr. Robert Adams (but it is not the man in the video). Mr. Adams had invented this device and similar variations about 25 years ago.
You can find all informations (plans, descriptions, pictures) here:
http://www.melog.ch/adams (http://www.melog.ch/adams)
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=Motor+Robert+Adams&meta= (http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=Motor+Robert+Adams&meta=)
It is a very good thing.
When a permanent magnet passes the core of the big electromagnet, the permanent magnet induces a magnetic field in the coil. Then the reed - contact shorts the coil (short-circuit). The now flowing current gives a kick to the permanent magnet in the right polarity and the rotor continues its rotation (also using the inertia of the permanent magnets in the right moment).
The trick is the collapsing field of the big coil.
The little cap and the resistor are only there to avoid sparks into the reed - contact.
The big cap improved the function (collecting the rest - current of the coil when the reed - contact is off (open)? / plan (circuit) necessary).
Unknown is not yet the function of the twisted wires.
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach, Germany
Hi Peter,
I watched the video again and I must say, you are probably right !
At around 6;30 you can hear the clicking sound of the reed relay switch...
So now I wonder, where exactly is such a reed relay switch located ?
Inside the coil ?
Where, at the lower side of the iron core ?
As there are only 2 connectors at the coil, I wonder, if the reed switch
is in parallel with the coil or in series with the coil.
Maybe it is in series with the coil ?
How does it normally work in a magnetron , or what he was speaking of where it was used ?
I think you are right, the twisted pair wire is only to make a show or
maybe be tried earlier to hook up a minilamp at the end of the pair via
the big charged up capacitor, but did not get it to light up... and then decided
just to let it run, but not to light up a load with it ???
So I guess you are right, this thing is only working due to the Lentz law violation effects
with the generated coil voltage being shorted out or dumped during the switching
and then the rotating magnet gets a kick and can rotate on.
1. So basically the magnet is attracted to the iron core of the coil, this induces
a voltage inside the coil, but this voltage is not yet dumped onto something,
open circuit.
2. When the magnet is top dead center over the iron core,
the reed switch is closed and it pushes the voltage "charge" onto the cap
or shorts out the coil, so the current pulse will again generate a magnet field
which will be kick the magnet away and give ita spin to overcome friction.
So this is classical Lentz law violation.
Now the question still is, if the reed switch shorts out the coil
or switches the coils across the cap ?
The big cap and the resistor were probably only there to try to store
some output voltage in the bigger cap to run a load via the twisted pair wire
and he later deceided, that not much power was left and did not cut the
twisted wire off...
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Stefan
We can't be sure if the wires are just for show. The video shows he tried to move it the opposite direction but it only seems to work one way. Over the twisted pair, then large cap, then coil.
Unless he didn't push it hard enough the other way? 3:02-31:15 frames?
BTW: there are about 30 posts in the You-tube page. Yours is there too Stefan
http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=P4sapBLNMoM&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3DP4sapBLNMoM
It woul be great if the builder comes back with details, instructions, and parts list as he indicated he would do in one of his msgs there
Mervace himself said that the best comment on the video was "I have a notion the device is being misrepresented."
I suspect this is an admission on his part that all things are not as they seem. The "resistor" in the photo I posted has a suspicious bump near one end. What does that mean?
Perhaps Mervace is a bit of a charlatan leading us on for some interesting discussion and a good laugh. If I had an overunity device some 15 years ago it would be far advanced today, and I would certainly have exploited the same for my own benefit and that of the world.
Quote from: mikestocks2006 on November 22, 2006, 07:56:58 PM
Stefan
We can't be sure if the wires are just for show. The video shows he tried to move it the opposite direction but it only seems to work one way. Over the twisted pair, then large cap, then coil.
Unless he didn't push it hard enough the other way? 3:02-31:15 frames?
BTW: there are about 30 posts in the You-tube page. Yours is there too Stefan
http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=P4sapBLNMoM&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3DP4sapBLNMoM
It woul be great if the builder comes back with details, instructions, and parts list as he indicated he would do in one of his msgs there
Did you try to post also any comment there ?
Please all do this there and please also try to post
the tread link of this overunity forum.
Does your comments gets through ?
Only 3 of my comments went through and my
other about 10 comments did not...
I wonder if the video-poster does censor them
or if Youtube has currently some problems.
Youtube always says, comments are stored and are added,
but nothing appears.
Please can you try it also to post a comment there ?
Many thanks.
You hear the reed switch in one passage, as I posted above.
Also he speaks ofthe coil having an internal reed switch...
You can not see it.
It is probably below the iron core and is activated,
when the magnet is buttom dead center over the iron core.
then the reed switch closes and
1. shorts out the coil
or
2. switches the coil across the small cap and charge it up.
Also it might rotate also into the other direction,
but he did not give it a strong enough kick at around 3 minute
into the video..
I wonder, why he tells us, that the twisted pair wire is
producing all the voltage ?
Will be want to play games with us and why are comments
being censured ?
so is it a fake or just a clever made device ?
He stated that his device operates on 5/1000 of a watt. That's not much. There are numerous ways to induce such a small current into a system.
As Mervace said, 'I hae ma doots' was, in his opinion, the best comment.
here is the clue.
he said:
"I have a notion the device is being misrepresented."
off course!
I could put a small batt inside the big electrolitic cap and still make it seem like it is a cap ;D.
cheers!
jose
Hi All,
Mervace uploaded Part 2 of his Unusual Motor device...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksWCYlLj9YE
Notice the definite kick the rotor magnet receives (00:29 sec) when it is passing over the coil's top dead center when he starts it after discharging the bigger (220uF, I think) cap, this may confirm a reed switch operation...
Gyula
HHAHHHAHAHA! PWND! :D
I did not know of Mr. Adams work. Now we are doing science. Is he still around or have they taken away. At the time I made my motor there was no huge exchange of ideas like nowadays, My idea was 90% thought with very little practical work The design was mostly from ideas learned while at secondray school. My motor, like most things in life requires perfect timing to run efficiently. At the time of my work I felt there were some unusual effects. I concentrated on getting a very efficient motor movement. You do not get much energy from a fully charged cap at the best of times. Oh . My comments do not always appear on UTUBE either. This is the first time I have seen your fourm. Also I only found UTUBE about a month ago. Things happen slower in the land down under. Do you have any contributors from Australia?
@Merv,
Can you post the schematic and give us more detail regarding the construction so that other people can replicate it successfully?
I take it that you are shorting the cap at the beginning. Have you tried it with a Faraday cage so that effects of a "100 kilowatt transmitter" be excluded?
As for Finsrud, I have personally visited him and his machine is for real (art is a separate issue). Yours (if indeed it shows a real effect) and his may not be too different in concept. As in yours, I guess, Finsrud's as well as Torbay's require excruciating pains to find the optimum conditions for continuous disbalance, as it were. This isn't easy. It has taken Finsrud decades and many, many unsuccessful constructions (some of which he showed me personally) to reach the point he is now.
@Merv,
Forgot to mention this. Production of excess energy has already been definitively proven in SMOT, even if SMOT is not in a closed-loop, which is in violation of the principle of conservation of energy. Therefore, I don't think we should worry now as to whether there are unusual effects at play. There are. The problem is now purely technical, that is, how to harness these effects in practical devices. Yours is probably a promising one but independent researchers have to replicate it and it has to be published in peer-reviewed journals.
Quote from: Merv on November 23, 2006, 04:56:30 AM
I did not know of Mr. Adams work. Is he still around or have they taken away.
Hello Merv,
nice to have you here now.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schmalenbach.de%2Fsarah%2Fadams2.jpg&hash=2f39efe2e1bcb4d2c6d0af2e4415ca34e38824ab)
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach
Quote from: Omnibus on November 23, 2006, 05:13:51 AM
@Merv,
Production of excess energy has already been definitively proven in SMOT, even if SMOT is not in a closed-loop, which is in violation of the principle of conservation of energy.
PLEASE! Show me a single example of overunity in any SMOT device open to full scientific scrutiny and replication by investigators. Do not cite Greg Watson, as his 3-foot MK-3 has never produced more than 5 cycles at a minute each. These devices always slow down and stop. This is the natural result of friction and magnetic resistance in the system. I eagerly await a full description of a working perpetuum SMOT device that has been duplicated by researchers with results published in reputable peer reviewed scientific media.
Here's a simple test. Calculate the pull when a ball is placed at the beginning of a SMOT. Energy is consumed placing it there. Let the ball exit the SMOT into a track and run until it stops. Now replace the SMOT with a ramp or other device that carries equal potential energy. See which one rolls farther.
@Adzoe,
This is incorrect:
?Here's a simple test. Calculate the pull when a ball is placed at the beginning of a SMOT. Energy is consumed placing it there. Let the ball exit the SMOT into a track and run until it stops. Now replace the SMOT with a ramp or other device that carries equal potential energy. See which one rolls farther.?
I apologize for posting text which is not directly connected with the topic of discussion but there is no other way to back up my statement above. Besides, in the long run it is connected with the discussion at hand. Here it goes:
Perpetual motion machine of the first kind is closely connected to the first law of thermodynamics which follows from the principle of conservation of energy. Even one of the statements of the first law of thermodynamics is: Perpetuum mobile of the first kind is impossible.
However, it was found recently that there are conditions at which the principle of conservation of energy can be violated. For instance in Naudin?s experiment:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm
it is immediately clear that while in the control experiment (drop from the input) the spent energy is (?mgh1) while the returned energy is R1 in the SMOT experiment (drop from the output) the spent energy is less, (-mgh1+Mb), while the returned energy is more, that is R2 > R1. Thus, in SMOT for even less input energy we get more returned energy than in the trivial (control) experiment.
The really definitive conclusion, however, regarding the violation of the energy conservation principle in SMOT is obtained by the analysis of the experiment shown in
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847
sketched schematically in
http://omnibus.fortunecity.com/smot.gif
In this experiment a researcher lifts the ball from point A to point B after which the ball spontaneously travels along B-C-A until closing the entire A-B-C-A loop. The net change of the magnetic potential energy when closing the A-B-C-A loop is zero (and that is the most detrimental for this argument condition). Nevertheless, the returned gravitational energy (+mgh1 +mgh2) is greater than the gravitational potential energy (-mgh1) spent. This is in violation of the principle of conservation of energy. Furthermore, the magnetic potential energy ?Ma spent could not have come from any energy reservoir, therefore, there is also excess magnetic potential energy +Ma produced which further reinforces the violation of the principle. Thus, when closing the A-B-C-A loop the excess energy produced is:
Enet = +mgh2 +Ma > 0
which is in clear violation of the principle of conservation of energy.
Violation of the principle of conservation of energy occurs only in certain circumstances whereby favorable overlapping of conservative fields occurs and these fields can mutually assist each other for parts of the loop (turning these fields into non-conservative ones). These conditions are to be specially sought and studied so that principally new energy sources can be created.
Although, due to the above findings, the principle of conservation of energy should not be considered any more as a principle of general validity it should be said that the mentioned violation does not affect most of what is already known in thermodynamics; especially where the mentioned favorable overlapping of conservative fields is not present.
You started the off-topic discussion by introducing SMOT here.
Now, as to your "proof"--
In the Naudin example you fail to include in your calculation (as does he) the energy necessary to place the ball into the position of potential energy at the beginning of the track.
No one questions that magnetic attraction occurs. For a comparable experiment one would need to add at the point where the SMOT begins a potential gravity energy equal to the potential of the magnetic field. The calculation necessary is the ounces of pull in the SMOT compared to the acceleration of gravity. We would do this by raising the beginning point to a level of equal potential energy minus the loss of the upward slope.
If you conduct this test you will discover that the ball will roll even farther than when it went through the SMOT. Of course, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" so I doubt this explanation will have much effect on your opinion.
In your second sample (the SMOT video) you again fail to consider the energy expended in placing the ball in the potential energy at the beginning of the SMOT device. There is no evidence of OU in either of your proof examples. All you have really shown is that the magnetic field in the SMOT is greater than the acceleration of gravity in the slight altitude lift of your examples.
The ramp is a well known mode for reducing the momentary force necessary to lift a weight by distributing the lift over a longer distance. This is all your SMOT device really accomplishes.
@Adzoe, you wrote:
?In the Naudin example you fail to include in your calculation (as does he) the energy necessary to place the ball into the position of potential energy at the beginning of the track.?
No, I don?t. Please read again what I said and try to understand it.
?No one questions that magnetic attraction occurs. For a comparable experiment one would need to add at the point where the SMOT begins a potential gravity energy equal to the potential of the magnetic field. The calculation necessary is the ounces of pull in the SMOT compared to the acceleration of gravity. We would do this by raising the beginning point to a level of equal potential energy minus the loss of the upward slope.?
Not so. The control experiment must be done the way Naudin does it. Again, please see Naudin?s video again and try to understand what he has done and then read my explanation.
?In your second sample (the SMOT video) you again fail to consider the energy expended in placing the ball in the potential energy at the beginning of the SMOT device. There is no evidence of OU in either of your proof examples. All you have really shown is that the magnetic field in the SMOT is greater than the acceleration of gravity in the slight altitude lift of your examples.?
Absolutely not. You have not understood my argument.
This is a useless exchange because you obviously have not put enough thought into the SMOT experiment. It is not as straightforward as you apparently perceive it.
Hi Merv, welcome to the forum ! Great to have you here and discuss your motor. Your motor seems to me really to be like an inverted SMOT, as your rotor are the magnets and thecoil core is the ball. It gives the "ball" a kick via shortening the coil, so it can leave the "track" with more speed. This principle could also be applied to the SMOT, if one would apply a good timed shorted coil there at the end of the track and use a magnet instead of iron as the roller device...but lets concentrate now to discuss over here the Merv motor please..
Just to chuck something in to the pot - think steel or iron wire for the twisted pair not copper
Quote from: smarthousesys on November 23, 2006, 10:02:57 AM
Just to chuck something in to the pot - think steel or iron wire for the twisted pair not copper
I already tested this.
There is no more induction than in copper,
so much less than 1 millivolt, my 0.15 Volts DC voltmeter full scale pointer just does not move..!
@Merv,
just had a look at your second video now !
;) You are a great teaser , aren?t you ! ;D ;D ;D
Thanks for naming my domain. ;)
So, are you using a thermocouple or a hall
sensor at the tip of the twisted pair wire to generate
a voltage ?
stephan
was not thinking induction - more magnetic attraction per the reverse smot idea
Ahh, I see,
you mean the rotating magnet is attracted to the iron
twisted pair wire and so will accelerate as in a SMOT ramp
and then induce current inside the center coil ?
This could also be the case, right ! ;)
Good idea !
Quote from: Omnibus on November 23, 2006, 07:57:25 AM
@Adzoe,
Viewing http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm one sees exactly what I said. You have added the potential energy of the magnetic attraction to the equation when you performed "drop from the output." Actually the "drop" is from the input of the SMOT.
I followed your argument reviewing the case. However, it is not sound. The completion of loop ABCA (and the input of the SMOT in the Naudin experiment)includes placing the ball at the beginning of the SMOT. If we removed gravity from the equation the ball would not naturally move to the beginning of the SMOT, as that is not the natural magnetic resting position. It would instead rise to the end of the SMOT. You are not considering the energy needed to move the ball to the beginning of the SMOT in your calculations. That energy is relatively small so it is easy to overlook. The "benefit" shown in the Naudin video is likewise small. This analysis shows your error of logic in both the Naudin and the other experiment.
@Adzoe,
Carefully observe that in Naudin?s experiment the energy to place the ball at the beginning of SMOT is even smaller than the energy to place the ball at the beginning of the control experiment. I told you this but you?re not reading carefully. Nevertheless, the energy obtained in the SMOT is greater than the energy obtained from the control experiment. This is in violation of the energy conservation principle. Please read carefully and try to understand the explanation because otherwise unnecessary clogging of the thread occurs which isn?t even a thread devoted to SMOT (although, ultimately, if mervace?s device shows a real effect, it is closely connected to SMOT).
Same arguments apply to the closed A-B-C-A loop. It is not true that I am not considering the energy needed to move the ball to the beginning of the SMOT in my calculations. I?m telling you again, you don?t understand the argument and it would be better to give it a little thought before posting.
Omnibus, Please do not start another endless rant in support of SMOT It's off topic. Please we had enough of your erroneous assertions on the "other" forum. You have over 2000 posts there. Please!!! There are plenty of other SMOT threads in Overunity.com. please spare us the torture in this thread.
@All
Please do not reply any SMOT discussions here.
Let's focus on what Merv has to say and the device at hand. Merv's device is one of the most interesting yet.
@Merv thank you for taking the time to join and provide information
Thank you all.
@AllPlease,
Exactly because of assertions such as yours these threads are turning into endless exchanges. You are wrong and you have to know this. Don't answer more because if you continue I will too.
Also, it is not true that this thread isn't connected to SMOT. It is. You obviously don't understand that and therefore it would be better to restrain from clogging the thread with your useless comments.
Quote from: hartiberlin on November 23, 2006, 11:38:22 AM
Ahh, I see,
you mean the rotating magnet is attracted to the iron
twisted pair wire and so will accelerate as in a SMOT ramp
and then induce current inside the center coil ?
This could also be the case, right ! ;)
Good idea !
I find it impossible to imagine a ferromagnetic material having any benefit in the twisted wire "gimmick". Any iron there would merely slow the rotor, as the gimmick is too far removed from the solenoid to create a magnetic field strong enough to attract the neo magnet downward. Anyone out there with a gauss meter to test this?
Hello
The answer as to whether the twisted pair is iron or not should be obvious, Does the long wire move when the magnet passes by in the video? No A long metal twisted wire anchored only on one end would move a noticable amount if a magnet was anywhere near it. hence no iron.
@All,
I don't think there will be much use of this quessing game before @mervace gives us more details about his device.
P.S. Did you notice what happened near the end of the video? Was that supposed to be funny?
I'm a bit curious about the solenoid, with the built-in reed switch. If this is a common configuration, forgive me - as I am not familiar with it.
How was this solenoid/switch device used in the original (microwave oven) application? What functions did it perform? How is such a configuration useful for switching current to the magnetron, as Merv mentions in the video - why not a conventional electromagnetic relay, etc?
On another note, others have mentioned the need for a diode rectifier in the circuit, but it appears that no such diode is in use. Before the era of solid-state or even vacuum rectifiers, chemical rectifiers were in use. Chemical rectifiers are not that different from electrolytic capacitors - they appear as a high resistance in one polarity, and a near-short in the reverse polarity. While I have little idea how this motor actually works, the chemical rectification concept might be worth considering - or at least eliminating.
Psst.. hey, Omnibus.. You have over three thousand posts of Finsrud and SMOT love, over at "the other" forum. Why can't you just respect the wishes of others, and keep these discussions out of this thread?
@legendre,
Usually I'm drawn into these endless discussions. The wishes of the participants are not always to be respected. Suppose these wishes are to blabber nonsense instead of sensible things. That's not something that calls for respect.
Besides, SMOT is very much appropriate here. Ultimately, that's the principle in this case too.
Quote from: legendre on November 23, 2006, 12:45:33 PM
I'm a bit curious about the solenoid, with the built-in reed switch. If this is a common configuration, forgive me - as I am not familiar with it.
How was this solenoid/switch device used in the original (microwave oven) application? What functions did it perform? How is such a configuration useful for switching current to the magnetron, as Merv mentions in the video - why not a conventional electromagnetic relay, etc?
Yes, if somebody could find this out, please post the answer over here.
I have already tried to find something via Google,
but maybe my search words were not right yet...
I also want to know, how the coil with integrated reed switch worked and how
the reed switch is wired inside it !
Many thanks.
Quote from: allcanadian on November 23, 2006, 12:30:12 PM
Hello
The answer as to whether the twisted pair is iron or not should be obvious, Does the long wire move when the magnet passes by in the video? No A long metal twisted wire anchored only on one end would move a noticable amount if a magnet was anywhere near it. hence no iron.
Hmm, as this is no big magnet the movement might not be very visible in the 2 posted videos..
Merv is just teasing us more and more...
Why is he doing this ?
To buildup much more interest ?
To be more famous, or what does he want to achieve ?
Here's a crackpot guess
We have a large coil with a reed switch, two capacitors-one small, one large, a magnet on a rotor, and a twisted wire. How can it work?
What if the twisted wire had no induced voltage but could act in a attractive manner when current was flowing through it(electromagnet). The twisted wire is in series with the large cap to form a resonant circuit, but fed by what?
The large coil and reed switch form what we know as an adams motor, most people don't understand the adams motor is not a pure repulsion motor. The magnet approaches the coil inducing a high voltage beacause the coil is large having many layers, when the magnet aligns with the coil a reed switch opens the circuit so there is no more forward current to produce backdrag, the induced voltage in attraction feeds the small cap. The reed switch opens and closes very quickly, it's only function is to stop forward current flow, when the reed switch closes the power in the small cap flows back through the coil but in the opposite direction repelling the magnet and travels into the twisted wire/cap resonant circuit.
Merv am I getting warm?
@Stefan,
These people somehow cannot undertand that the more open they are the better their interests will be protected. What did Finsrud, for instance, achieve with his lack of cooperation? Basically being ignored by almost everybody. Same thing with Torbay.
In this case I'm also puzzled by the tone of the whole presentation. At times it somehow calls not to be taken seriously, don't you think? Why is that?
Quote from: Adzoe on November 23, 2006, 12:22:55 PM
Quote from: hartiberlin on November 23, 2006, 11:38:22 AM
Ahh, I see,
you mean the rotating magnet is attracted to the iron
twisted pair wire and so will accelerate as in a SMOT ramp
and then induce current inside the center coil ?
This could also be the case, right ! ;)
Good idea !
I find it impossible to imagine a ferromagnetic material having any benefit in the twisted wire "gimmick". Any iron there would merely slow the rotor, as the gimmick is too far removed from the solenoid to create a magnetic field strong enough to attract the neo magnet downward. Anyone out there with a gauss meter to test this?
If you watch closely the video,
it could be, that there is some iron in the wire, so the magnet rotor is accelerated,
cause at the lower end also the wire is bowed away, so the magnet
can move on..
As Merv said in the video it is a very sensitive setup and hard to tune,
but on theother hand, it would also attract the twisted pair wire and
probably induce rising back and forth shaking of the wire to generate mechanical
oscillation... Could these be strong enough to be seen in the video ?
I have to rewatch again...
Maybe the wire is only for a show and as Merv seems to like to
tease people, especially at the end of the second video,
I wonder, if he is not trying to fool us, so we should think
the working principle is different, when all it does the trick
is only a shorted timed center coil via the reed switch ???
Or is he using a hall device to generate voltage at the tip
of the twisted pair hidden there ?
Quote from: allcanadian on November 23, 2006, 01:05:46 PM
The magnet approaches the coil inducing a high voltage beacause the coil is large having many layers, when the magnet aligns with the coil a reed switch opens the circuit so there is no more forward current to produce backdrag, the induced voltage in attraction feeds the small cap. The reed switch opens and closes very quickly, it's only function is to stop forward current flow, when the reed switch closes the power in the small cap flows back through the coil but in the opposite direction repelling the magnet and travels into the twisted wire/cap resonant circuit.
Merv am I getting warm?
Ahh, do you think the reed switch is closed all the time and shorts out the coil and
only opens when the magnet is top dead center above it ?
I thought the reed switch is open all the time andjust closes for a short
moment, when the magnet is over it...
Hmm, we really have to find out, how these old magnetron coils worked !
Can somebody find a circuit diagramm from an old microwave oven please ?
Many thanks.
Quote from: Omnibus on November 23, 2006, 12:52:45 PM
@legendre,
Usually I'm drawn into these endless discussions.
Sure, except in those instances where you, in fact,
start those discussions - as in this thread.
Quote
The wishes of the participants are not always to be respected.
Yes, and since you, personally, are the unassailable qualifier of all things sensible and nonsensical, I'm sure this works out very well for you.
In any event, please continue to rationalize your unpleasant behaviour in any manner you see fit.
my thinking that the wire is not iron is because while the magnet may be attracted to it- it still must be removed from it, hence no gain.
@legendre,
So, then, you are the personally, are the unassailable qualifier of all things sensible and nonsensical, correct?
Listen, I'm not here to please you. Get off my back and go get a life. What a nuisance.
Please @legendre and @omnibus,
don?t start a flame war over here.
Please concentrate onto the topic.
Let?s just discuss the SMOT in different threads.
Many thanks for understanding.
Maybe we should wait, until user Merv will tell us
more and concentrate in this moment to find a circuit diagram
of an old microwave oven, where this coil with integrated REED switch is used.
Maybe it is not just a simple on / off switch , but a toggle switch,
so the coil could be shorted out and otherwise be in series with the external cap ,
when the switch is open ?
Maybe Merv just wants to get the most viewed
video on Youtube !??? ;D ;D ;D
So he might produce more nonconclusive videos
first, before he reveals anything ???
hi
i just threw that in about the iron wire as it seemed a way something useful could be gained by having it. The weak SMOT type interaction of the wire( the wire in the model is not close to the magnet at all) and the magnet would provide a force that would drive the magnet to the large bulk iron solenoid core to which it would be strongly attracted.
Hello Harti
When I read Adam's original patent it basically stated that he uses what I call forced resonance, It is resonance but 180 Deg out of phase with the source. This is what I understood from the patent-
A magnet approaches a coil, it is in attraction to the core, a voltage is induced in the coil windings, current flows in a forward direction in the windings.
- if you try to reverse the current flow to repell the magnet as in DC motors, you must first add as much energy to stop forward current as was added by induction, then you must add an amount of energy equal to the attractive power of the magnet to remove it. you pay twice
So adams concluded it's better to take the induced voltage on attraction and send it to charge a cap, but most importantly at register you must stop all forward current or you pay for it, open the circuit stopping all current flow so there can be no backdrag-no extra energy needed to stop the forward current flow. The switch contacts will ionize and arc unless a small high voltage cap is placed in parallel with it. The switch is then closed, all the induced energy on the cap flows back through the coil in a reversed direction repelling the magnet with the same force as was present on attraction- so the attraction/repulsion are a wash/equal. So what do you gain?
Adams called his machine a motor/generator, why not generator, or just motor.
The induced voltage stored on the cap-sent back through the coil in a reversed direction is then sent to a battery, a cap but not an inductive load which would effect the coil.
I thought this was common knowledge?
@allcanadian,
That sounds pretty interesting. Have you seen Adam's motor working?
No, I built one a year ago- the problem is switching it's not easy, as adams said the time function of the switching element dictates the effect completely. The shorter the switching time the more power saved/gained, you open and close the switch as fast as possible at register without arcing the switch- that's it
What did you think Newman was doing?
Half of the power he generated was wasted by his arcing mechanical switches, but the kicker is solid state switches will fry. With newmans light shows at his switch contacts Im amazed it does anything.
@allcanadian,
In the Merv case there must be some clever way of avoiding this problem with the switching. I remained with the impression there's no switch, although I can't fathom how else this kick at the 29s could be achieved. Perhaps just at the right moment two opposing fields cancel each other. What bothers me is that @peter_schmalenbach found no tangible current that could charge the cap. Stefan too. I don't remember what @tao did in this respect.
Well, as I said before, this is a guessing game which may easily be avoided if @Merv is a little more cooperative.
Harti,
When someone claims to be an innocent bystander, of events which they themselves set into motion, a little touch-up of reality is required. But of course, I will respect the wishes of the participants, with respect to flamewarring. End of topic? ;)
About the coil.. if the reed switch were in series, in a normally-closed position, the device would behave like an oscillating relay - as soon as the coil became energized, the switch would open, breaking the current. The field would collapse, the switch would close, and the cycle would repeat.
On the converse, if the switch were in series in the normally-open position, the device would not function at all, without an external magnetic influence to close the switch. Once closed, the device would behave like a latching relay.
Correct my thinking, if I'm off.
The twisted wires seem to be non ferrous for sure.
To prove it easily you can look at the videos when the rotor is moving and the camera is stationary. Concentrate on the wire relative to the stationary device frame (Black A-Frame). There is no relative movement as the magnet passes in front of the twisted pair wire. It also looks like solid core vs stranded but not 100% clear.
Also the sequence seems important. Merv tried to move it "backwards" and it doesn?t seem to work. It seems it requires magnet movement over the twisted pair, then capacitor, then coil.
It is clear if you pause the video at the right frames, that the twisted wire is mounted both wires are the base and also in parallel with the larger (blue) cap. Maybe polarity is important? along with direction of wire twist and relative magnet movement?
Having the coil circuit open and shorting it right on the moment where the magnet is on top maybe also another key. It may help reduce or even reverse the attraction at that point. Merv might be able to shed some more light here.
I looked for info on integrated coil/reed switch but nothing too relevant as one unit. I wonder if incorporating the reed - coil as 2 units might do the trick? Reed switch activated by max magnetic flux induced when the magnet is dead center on top of the solenoid?
Caps/resistor are used to slowly dissipate the effect afterwards so there is less drag on the magnet as it moves away? Then the reed switch falls back to open position when the magnet is sufficiently away etc.
What is of high importance imo is, the ?fixed? speed it rotates there is no acceleration per se from the starting cycles to an overall steady state like regular motors.
Maybe the rotor's cycles per second has to do with the tuning/dissipating times of the solenoid/cap resistor circuit bellow?
Thanks folks, nice topics
@mikestocks2006,
What struck me was that at the 29th second when the actual motion began a very slight movement by the hand caused the rotor to be picked up and kicked by a field that seemed already there. Could it be that the caps were pumped by the earlier motions. Did you notice also that while he was shorting the cap at one point the rotor moved as if due to a magnetic pulse?
legendre that's a brilliant idea! induced current flow disconnects the circuit,current stops, switch closes.
Why the hell didn't I think of that!!
It should be safe to say that the wire is solid-core; I don't know how you'd get stranded wire of that gauge to hold its form so well, against gravity. If stranded, they are relatively large strands.
The caps are connected with the negative leads to black, and positive leads to red in both cases.
That twisted wire baffles me :-\
If it can't induce voltage why have it there, it must be what drives this thing, not an input but an output.
@allcanadian,
Indeed, strange wire. Some sort of a cap. Notice how the rotor moved upwards at the 7th second when he was shorting it.
Sorry, stupid question. Haven't been able to read all the messages, so maybe it has been answered before.
( looks like overunity.com doesn't like New Zealand *grin*)
Those 2 wires, the red and black one. By the look of it they are connected to the big cap.
Situation 1 - they are connected/closed at the top. In that case you have a simple coil/capacitor arrangement. Question there, what is the resonance frequency of it.
Situation 2 - they are not connected. In that case the 2 parallel wires would act ... like another capacitor (ok, a very bad one). More interesting, it would be a 'twisted' capacitor.
Would that make sense? First impression - NO - but I remember have seen a webpage where they did exactly this. They affected capacitors with moving magnets. Because of the twist the magnet is not following the wire in a parallel motion, it is crossing it under an angle.
Does anyone remember who did those experiments? Stefan, you ever tried this, connecting two twisted wires to a capacitor and then move a magnet along them? On the webpage they were trying to create a 'no drag' generator.
Cheers,
Rainer
Ok, out on a limb re: the coil/switch:
Modern microwave ovens use a mains voltage relay to control magnetron power, by switching on & off the primary current to the high-voltage transformer. A bit of research tells me that some older microwave ovens used a high-voltage reed relay (solenoid) to actually switch the high-voltage side, as a means to control the power to the magnetron. I believe this is the device in question. The switch would have required a set of NO contacts, but this is not to say that a set of NC contacts were not available - standard parts, you know.
Problem is, all high voltage relays require at least three, if not four terminals - two for control, two for switching. There is of course the possibility that they share a common return, but not very likely - it would be desirable to isolate the HV and primary sides as well as possible.
The inventor uses the phrase "had a reed switch inside of it" - now, this may just be a loose use of speech, but one might take it to mean that the switch is no longer present. This is supported by the fact that there are only two terminals in use on the coil.
So, I conclude that either the reed switch has been wired in series, as we have theorized, or it has simply been eliminated entirely. The rhythmic sound in the video seems to be a washing machine, running in the background.. this is a domestic setting, after all. Also, we cannot be sure that there is perfect a/v sync in the video itself.
Ok, I've had it with this damn thing until this evening :)
Here is how it probably works.
Look at the attached picture. (You must be logged into the forum)
The magnet, when it approches the coil is attracted to the coil,
as the reed switch is closed and the generated current is into this
direction, that it supports the attraction of the magnet !
This is the Anti-Lenz opportunity of the Adams motor which we discussed
a few years back also with Greg Watson, if somebody still remembers this! ;)
This is for sure, the shortcircuited current attracts the magnet and accelerates it
into the direction of the iron core.
Okay, then when the magnet is top dead center the reed switch opens !
In this moment the coil makes a huge voltage induction pulse and the voltage
reverses at the coil... !
But as the cap is parallel now with the coil and this makes almost a shortcircuit
to the coil again ( non charged big cap is like a shortcircuit in the first moment)
also a big reversal current flows inside the coil !
This indeed produces a reversed magnet field which will kick the magnet away !
This is probably the whole function principle of the motor !
The twisted wire is only for a show...
You can even make the motor better and capture energy,
if you place a diode in front of the cap, so the charge into the cap can not discharge,
when the rotor is away and the reed switch closes again and discharging the cap again
until the next rotor magnet comes in...
Very clever circuit !
Regards, Stefan.
Hey harti
It's also interesting that the circuit you drew on the left is basically a buck-booster circuit or DC-DC converter.
Draw a positive line coming into the top of the coil and a negative line into the bottom of the coil and you have a classical DC-DC converter booster which can operate with efficiencies upwards of 96% .
This is one of my favorite circuits, transformers are old news.
So here is a better circuit, where you can really run a load with it
and also have a blinking LED with it.
Picture attached.
Hey Harti
It took me a minute but I found a way to explain what Im getting at, in the circuit you drew with the scope shot the voltage rises then reverses when the switch opens this is exactly right. The problem is if you put an ammeter in the circuit you would find the "current" does not reverse at register it remains forward even on collapse of the B field. The current drives the magnetic field-so the magnetic field does not reverse, thus the magnet is not repelled it is coasting out of register with a reduced amount of backdrag because you have shorted the coil.
What Im saying is adams produced a true current reversal, the voltage AND the current reversed, there is a huge difference. I have enclosed a picture (1) is the plot of your circuit-red is voltage-blue current
(2) Adams motor plot-Voltage in red-current is blue.
@allcanadian,
no, I ploted also the current.
i(t) is the current over time in the coil in electrotechnical terms.
t is the time.
Normally I would agree, that the current just only decreases, but does not reverse.
But not so with this circuit, as when the reversed Back EMF is produced
as the reed switch had opened, the empty cap is then directly across the coil
and the reversed voltage is fully discharged into the cap,
so also the current direction in the coil reverses, which will
also change the magnetic polarity of the coil and kick the magnet away !
So the iron must be pretty soft inside the core as it reverses its flux all the time
and the hysteresis losses must be reduced.
This is probably also the case, why the rotor does not pickup more speed !
Scale the coil up and use bigger magnets and my better output circuit can really
generate power and also the rotor will deliver mechanical power !
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: hartiberlin on November 23, 2006, 03:56:22 PM
Here is how it probably works.
Look at the attached picture. (You must be logged into the forum)
The magnet, when it approches the coil is attracted to the coil,
as the reed switch is closed and the generated current is into this
direction, that it supports the attraction of the magnet !
This is the Anti-Lenz opportunity of the Adams motor which we discussed
a few years back also with Greg Watson, if somebody still remembers this! ;)
This is for sure, the shortcircuited current attracts the magnet and accelerates it
into the direction of the iron core.
Hi Stefan,
I am puzzled by why a short circuited coil is able to attract an approaching magnet?
So far whenever I placed a short circuited coil near to a rotating magnet, Lenz law always reduced the speed of the magnet's rotation...
Would you (or someone else here) mind explaining briefly this case?
Many thanks,
Gyula
Hi All,
I tried moving a ceramic 8 magnet over a 1000uF 100v capacitor and there is a small amount of current but you are talking a couple of uA.
I also tried a length of twisted wire and even on the lowest scale I could barely see any reading in the uV scale.
One thing I did notice was that the capacitor slowly builds a small voltage if connected to a volt meter.
In about a minute or two it rises from zero to about 500mV.
Hi Mervace,
Nice motor.
Can you post a circuit diagram with component values.
The one thing that puzzles me and everyone else is to what triggers the pulse in the coil.
Why does the rotation speed not increase or is it air friction keeping the speed low?
Regards
Rob
If this circut is OU . we need energy source . All Tesla OU have antena (like his electrical car)
this twisted cables could by just antena.
Best George
Im going to have to rebuild my adams motor I think,and see what harti's circuit does for it. I started a thread in pulse motors as I don't like off topics in threads either. Harti could you send your pics to pulse motors/adams revised for reference?
So where the hell is Merv?
Here is the circuit broken up into 2 parts:
case 1 and case 2
case 1 is the approaching magnet inducing a voltage into the coil and
as the reed switch is always closed this is producing a current i(t)
inside the coil that is flowing from top to bottom through the coil.
case 2 is the case, when the magnet is top dead center and the reed switch
opens for a few milliseconds and then the coil voltage reverses and the current also
reverses in this case and flows from bottom to top inside the coil.
This way also the magnet field of the coil reverses and kicks the magnet away.
When the magnet is a few degrees away after top dead center the reed switch is
closing again and shorts the rest of the Back EMF voltage so the magnet is eaven
more kicked away as the current rises in this case again.
The LED keeps the cap not discharged in this case and can deliver its charge to the load resistor
RLoad where a current i2(t) is flowing then.
Do this system is not breaking thro metal core?
Will by interesting how it works on air core?
George
George, it will not work with air core coils,
as you need the iron to concentrate the flux onto
the reed switch to open it up,
when the magnet is top dead center above the iorn core.
Also you would not have any attraction to the iorn core when the
magnet is aproaching.
Morray system is working whiteout metal cores , isn't?
george
To generate EMF you don?t need metal core , but metal is breaking magnet
george
My Guess is there?s a circuit from a ?perpetual motion art?
In the very top cross brace. a simple battery, reed switch and coil.
Like this,
http://www.infinitygc.com.au/shop/category24_1.htm
I would like to see him bend that spiral wires away from
The device while running, I bet it would still run
Cliff,
Now here are also the voltage, current and coil flux density curves
with the circuits.
Enjoy !
Correct me if Im wrong but your LED is forward biased like a diode, it is a light emitting diode therefore no current can flow through it in a reverse direction. So if the switch is open and the current/voltage cannot flow through the LED(diode) it has no reverse path? I have been designing and testing electronic circuits for 30 years so Im fairly certain this won't work as depicted.
Yes, in case 1 there will be no LED light as there will flow no
current through it.
The 2 arroys at the LED are just to tell, that it is a LED and not just
a normal diode... sorry, for the mixup...
I got it while you were posting my mistake!
But you are not useing the induction current on approach of the magnet, it does no work. So you only get half the output which is barely enough to break even.
I just received this from Mervyn
(user Merv in this forum)
as I did send him a private email to his email address, which I can see as the admin
of this forum.
I hope he is really the inventor and I have asked him to post this same
message also on the Youtube site under the Mervace user name, so we know it is him.
So it seems the motor is just powered by a nearby CB radio transmitter,
or did I get this wrong ??
He writes:
"Thanks Stefan. The key to the high efficency is in
that adams motor diagram. .I look forward to seeing
some table top examples of my motor. my first set
ups showed there was lost energy from every aspect
of the design. Set an AM radio next to it. That lead
to the idea of an aerial pick up to try and retrive
some. Have you guys never played with an SWR meter and
a CB radio. You can light a tourch bulb with a simple
set up like that. Thats when my table top bare bone
motors evolved to the present sculpture and gathered
dust for so long .Peter from Gremany soon worked out
the principals . As we all know here there is no free
energy but lots floating in the local enviroment. Look
at table top Sterling heat engines.I just had to make
massive amounts to produce a very weak responce Of
course my motor has hidden reeds, signal diode etc but
no battery. I will post the details when i get time.
Im amazed this produced such great intrest I really
must get back to work now Regards
Mervyn."
--- Stefan Hartmann wrote:
> Hi Mervace,
> I just posted a better circuit for your motor,
> where you can really power an external device.
>
>
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1720.msg18381.html#msg18381
>
>
> Please can you try this ?
> Many thanks !
>
> Gruss / Best regards, Stefan Hartmann
Ahh so it is powered by local transmissions.
Ahh well, back to the MEG experiment for me then.
I was looking forward to something that worked.
Regards
Rob
Hi Stefan,
Is this a disappointment or what?
We have to get back to the good old SMOT, the only viable device so far definitively violating the principle of conservation of energy.
So it is an adams motor cool, Harti I think were on the same page, I just interpreted adams work differently.
Here is a diagram of what I have done, red arrows are induced current in attraction, blue arrows are full reversed current to a load.
the magnet approaches coil induced current (red)charges small cap full first-then large cap
when switch opens at register small cap is charged to higher voltage from forward current spike
switch closes- small cap discharges first, reversing current through coil to load(blue), large cap discharges reversing current through coil and powering load(blue).
The only difference is that current is flowing on approach and retreat of the magnet, current flow does not imply work unless energy is radiated or forces such as back-drag are incurred.
@mramos,
Yes you did. Stefan was sceptical too. @peter_schmalenbach rejected it out of hand. Recall, I suggested to put the device in a Faraday cage to avoid this trivial possibility which, unfortunately, turned out to be the case. So, there is some healthy scepticism here.
As for SMOT, as I said many times, it violates the principle even as is, not in a closed loop and that's definitive. This has far-reaching scientific consequences. For practical purposes, however, the excess energy produced in SMOT has to be harnessed in a self-sustaining device probably similar to Torbay motor.
@All,
Well, good, at least, that the matter was resolved in several days and didn't protract itself for months in these endless threads.
Does no one get this? a self sustaining motor powered from external environmental sources! You know a man called Tesla reported doing just such a thing, and powering a car with it. And here it is dismissed off the cuff as nothing of importance WOW.
Hey merv I am very interested in this machine and the fact that you have put a lot of time and effort into it. If you could post even simple plans I would be very grateful.
I would love one of these to put on the mantle at home just for me- while a guy's thinking of free energy-that would be cool
@allcanadian,
Why Tesla? Every radio is such a device. That's not what a self-sustaining device is.
If this device is powered by random RF energy from other sources you do not have to supply that is very cool.
mramos knows what Im talking about, a conversation piece, something to make a person think--Like this forum for example.
Tune it to 60Hz tweak it a bit, runs anywhere in the house-I think that's cool
Ok it's settled Im building one--- Plans anyone Please
Perpetuum mobile (here referred to as ?overunity?) isn?t about stealing energy from the nearby power lines or the local radio station.
omnibus
Im not sure you understand the concept of transmitted power, the amount of power recieved from RF radio stations does not change the transmitted power, Energy from far away power lines is wasted energy it cannot effect the source- the power companies should be lucky we do not sue them for EM pollution. I would love to see that court case-power company sues for theft of power -overturned and forced to pay damages for EM pollution, Billion dollar class action suit ruins power company.
@allcanadian,
The power companies will win such lawsuit. Otherwise anyone who robs them of their product ( the power they sell) may construe this as utilizing the pollution and the wasted power.
Yes Allcanadian..my motor idea sitting on your mantle piece would look good. I produced my motor a long time ago. Guess how I felt when a few years later I could buy on of those Swing Art mobiles in the local shop. Someone made big $ from that They used less components than me . Just added the 9 V battery in the base. Has anyone a diagram of those coils . No reed switch just a double coil and a NPN Tr to do the switching. My motor remains a piece of possibly unique art but it demonstrates what I still think is the ultimate conclusion to all threads here. No free Energy.. Hope omnibus stops been cranky with me . We are all gentlemen here I hope? my video was only to generate intrest in my ideas from yesteryear. Its all been done before its great how we all look at things from different angles that?s how we learn new things .I hope some of you experiment with this some more.
What were you all doing last Week! My motor is not a mock of those swing Art designs Please give me more credit than that guys. However it can be no more than a conversation piece
The first crystal sets did not need batteries Remember how magical that seemed at the time
Quote from: Merv on November 23, 2006, 11:25:37 PM
Yes Allcanadian..my motor idea sitting on your mantle piece would look good. I produced my motor a long time ago. Guess how I felt when a few years later I could buy on of those Swing Art mobiles in the local shop. Someone made big $ from that They used less components than me . Just added the 9 V battery in the base. Has anyone a diagram of those coils . No reed switch just a double coil and a NPN Tr to do the switching. My motor remains a piece of possibly unique art but it demonstrates what I still think is the ultimate conclusion to all threads here. No free Energy.. Hope omnibus stops been cranky with me . We are all gentlemen here I hope? my video was only to generate intrest in my ideas from yesteryear. Its all been done before its great how we all look at things from different angles that?s how we learn new things .I hope some of you experiment with this some more.
What were you all doing last Week! My motor is not a mock of those swing Art designs Please give me more credit than that guys. However it can be no more than a conversation piece
Hi Merv,
as you teased us now a few days, maybe you can at least release some more video,
where you show your CB transmitter and how you did set it all up ?
By the way, there are really concepts that work overunity, like
the Methernitha Testatika or the Morray "Radiation powered amplifier"
or the Linnard Hydrogen on Demand unit or the recent fuelfromh2o.com
SuperGen concept... so lots of new things also to learn for you... !
So back to my drawing board working on an enhanced Newman device with
NiMh batteries and new RF burst magnification...and battery recharge,
the first part of the circuit is a resonant one which tunes in to a transmiting frequency from nearby and also the magnet passing by the antenna/coils acts as a self tuning/aadjusting transformer with a ferro core, at one point during the passing of the magnet it tunes in to the strongest frequency generating the voltage necessary to power the coil.of course it needs to be rectified first.
am i right? if not forgive me please.
I have only posted to Stefan s web site here... overunity DOT com is something completely. Where's your sence of humour omnibus.. don't dismiss my efforts even though it was 15 yrs ago.. Allcanadian and mramos are thinking about applications. Executive Toy Remove the battery and youve beat the Swing Art Mobile .But is there any point ? You need a sence of Humour if you read some threads on this website & I haven't even looked at Anti Grav Yet.. does anyone have pictures of Finsruds machines? Creations...
Dear Merv,
why do you not give us the plan and the construction details of your device?
What's the reason?
Didn't you register your device as a patent until now?
We only want to build up 1 sample for our own use, for improvements and study.
Have a nice day.
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach
Hello again Peter and Stefan.
I have just read the description of Finsruds machine. I?m sure you have all discussed it in here in the past. If the device sits in an artist?s studio it must be Art imitating science. Or perhaps mocking it. Surely the addition of a couple of randomly pulsing electro magnets within the described chaotic pendulum part of the machine would be enough to maintain random movement of the pendulum.
Look at the device from the inventors point of view . He has worked for years at making a little steel ball move round in a circle ,built a machine to achieve this task with 90% efficency ,Then continues to fine tune it to produce 99.99 to 100% efficiency. How much easier is it to start with 110 % and work backwards? The Author John Pasley creates the impression that he feels privileged to have had the opportunity to view the device, felt that there might even have been a drop in room temperature while in the vicinity of the creation and its creator. The machine just felt right. Like Pythagoras theory. He then gives us Mr Finsruds world view of things. And ends his report by saying he has absolutely no idea how it works. My argument can easily be dismissed by saying I have missed the point completely. Yet the machine continues to sit in a basement in Norway. The effect achieved by this is a lot more than just a ball turning in a circle. These are just my own immediate impressions of that article, surely someone in your threads would have came to similar conclusions or am I just posting in the wrong forum .Peter I respect entirely the work you are doing . I think I understand from your videos what you are trying to achieve. But do you really believe you can get more than one revolution of that Ball? Now you ask me why I do not give you the plan of my simlpe motor?. I await your reply. Regards, Mervyn
Hi Mervyn,
I would like to know why you wrote in your video Part 2 that the Torbay motor would never work?
You think it is hoax?
thanks
Gyula
Quote from: Merv on November 24, 2006, 07:28:52 AM
Hello again Peter,
I respect entirely the work you are doing . I think I understand from your videos what you are trying to achieve. But do you really believe you can get more than one revolution of that Ball? Now you ask me why I do not give you the plan of my simlpe motor?. I await your reply. Regards, Mervyn
Hello Mervyn,
my device is not yet finished.
The start of the circle is stage 15 and the end is stage 14. I still must excactly adjust these stages. But then the other stages change their features (characteristics). It is very difficult.
Then
it could be that the ball rolls continuous.
Today I have received a letter from SIEMENS in Muenchen (Munich). They are interested in my device.
Please look at my new video. The ball now has more speed.
http://www.schmalenbach.de/video3.mpg (http://www.schmalenbach.de/video3.mpg)
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach
Hi All,
Yes when I first saw a crystal set working for the first time, I thought, Wow!, radio for free, no batteries.
I then built my own and I used to walk home from school with a rucksack containing my radio and a long stick poking out of the top with the antenna wire on. The high impedance headphones looked like ex-army surplus, so I must have looked a bit odd. I remember thinking that I wish the traffic was not so noisy as the sound from the headphones was so faint. I think I was about 12 at the time.
When I was about 14 I built an AM radio into a tic-tac box using ZN414 chip and 2 hearing aid batteries - even etched my own sub-miniature PCB. Took it to school and no-one believed you could build a radio so small until they listened to it through the crystal earphone.
When I was 16 I built an FM radio to take on holiday with me on our boat, but as I was leaning over the side with all the kit on a piece of wood it fell into the ocean.......
With this circuit I would like to say, its easy just put all the components into the lower section of that bobbin on a circular PCB using surface mount parts,use a rechargeable button cell, wind some tape around it and leave people thinking its just a coil.
The clever bit that Merv has implied he has done and that is to use a mechanical trigger like a reed switch to pulse the coil with the stored power in the capacitors.
Regards
Rob
Hey guys
I just watched that movie "the inconvienient truth", You absolutely have to see this. We have all been misled by our governments-it is much worse, I have hundreds of hours of research on global warming but the facts and data given in the movie quite frankly scared me to the core. We just don't get it ---We are screwed unless we do something in the next five years-------
Now I heard Merv has a simple device maybe we can imporove upon or learn from, but he is going to keep it to himself, for no other reason than it may have some value.
Ya thanks for nothing merv!
This is exaclty why we are in this crisis, because of people like merv.
After watching this movie I realized there are millions of merv's out there and they will contribute nothing that doesn't serve there purpose first. I have found new cause to pursue this OU technology relentlessly and I promise you EVERYTHING I know will be published here.
So let's focus, let's keep on topic and share our facts--- I think the time for petty differences is over, we can't afford to wait.
Now, as we know it is powered by CB radio, the working principle seems to be pretty easy.
The dipole twisted pair antenna is tuned exactly due to its length to the radio frequeny and at the base is a diode, that charges up the big fist cap.
Then the charge is going via the current limiting resistor to the second smaller cap. Now this cap probably has a voltage then of at least 500 mV to 1 Volt.
Now the hidden reed switch is just in series with the coil and just pulses this cap voltage onto the coil, when the rotor magnet is top dead center to repell it away and thus give it a kick away.
When the reed switch opens again, the cap has time to charge up again. Pretty simple circuit. So the rotor is only shortly repelled, when the reed switch drops the cap charge onto the coil...
Hi Allcanadian,
I agree with what you are saying.
By now we should all be driving electric cars, house roofs should be covered in solar panels, we should all be re-cycling and all fast food outlets should be closed down.
Some of these things are expensive but in the long run can we afford not to do it.
When I say to people at work you should be using low energy bulbs, the usual reply is why should I give a stuff if a couple of hundred million Chinese are going to do the opposite and undo any good I have done, or what difference can one person possibly make?
I give up arguing after a while.
Nuclear power was always looked upon as a bad idea, but these days its looking like a better option to coal and gas.
I have a lot of hope pined on the hot fusion power stations for the future. The Tokamak.
They have given the go ahead to built a full size working model now that will be completed in 10 years.
http://www.fusion.org.uk/st/powerplant.html
Regards
Rob
Overunity is a misnomer. Nothing in this macro-universe is overunity. The laws of thermodynamics always apply. This hardly means, however, that our efforts are screwed from the beginning.
Advocates of overunity point to the utilization of devices that extract energy from environmental energy sources as examples (generally referred to as free energy). There are hydroelectric plants, solar collectors, wind machines, and animal life as it extracts energy from plant sources.
OU advocates like ourselves are convinced that there is a "sea of energy" out there that could be exploited. A calm sea, however, offers little to latch onto and take advantage of. Calm air does not turn rotors. Calm waters do not spin turbines. Our quest, then, is for disturbances in the vast sea from which we might extract a bit of their energy.
In my alterego at Youtube, THUNDERBIRD82, I argued from the beginning that the Mervace device either contained batteries, was pre-charged, or extracted environmental energy. The latter proved to be the case, though that energy was inefficiently supplied by Merv.
My discussion with our good friend, Omnibus, on Youtube and here about SMOT and Finstrud, centered on the question of what environmental energy potential variance is or could be responsible for the operation of either device.
In the case of Finstrud, watching the 47 minute video, I noted that the track on which the ball runs is not rigidly stable, but that the area in front of the ball is always sloped downward and the area behind it always raised so that the ball is constantly "surfing" a wave. I postulated to myself that this is the secret of the device's operation. I postulated publicly that any number of environmental variations could be employed to cause this mechanical perturbance.
SMOT enthusiasts, Adams and Bedini motor students (with many others that could be named) hope to exploit the variations in flux densities of the magnetic field to accomplish work. While there are many claims of success, nobody seems willing to divulge enough information to prove their claims, benefit the world, and make themselves billionaires.
To draw a lesson from the computing world we should look at two developments: the Ohio Scientific computers, and the IBM PC. At the time when Apple computers and the PC ran strictly on floppy disks in single user configurations Ohio Scientific omputers were available with an 80MB hard drive, 16-port multiuser, multi-processor systems, and networks 256 terminals wide. They also had a developed database management system. Today, however, they are only a footnote in the personal computing world.
The PC had none of these advantages. What made it a global phenomenon, however, was that since IBM expected to never sell more than a few thousand units, it was designed from off the shelf parts in an open system. OSI tried to maintain strict control over every aspect of their system.
This is where we need to be in the OU quest. Massive financial interests from governments to huge business conglomerates are bent on our failure. This is understandable. They have gigantic investments in infrastructure whose returns are dependent on their distributional control of energy. Trillions of dollars are invested in municipal and corporate bonds to distribute electricity. More trillions are sunk in wells, pipelines, oil tankers, refineries, and gas stations. Personal, corporate, and governmental investments in these infrastructures would be lost if they were no longer needed.
One hears tales of government confiscation of usable intellectual property under the guise of national security (which, in view of financial collapes is a valid concern).
However, today we are faced with issues of global collapse from the environmental impact of our energy consumption. Kingrs mentions this and advocates nuclear power. However, there are global concerns there too. In Washington state a plume of leaked radioactive material threatens to spill into the Columbia River, with devastating impact. We are trying desperately to find ways of dealing with increasing mountains of nuclear waste.
For the benefit of us all we need to make OU research an open system with free contributions of intellectual property much like the open system that drives Linux and its derivatives in the computer software industry.
Any comments or thoughts?
If you want to understand OU, you need to understand one thing- Quantum mechanics"
Here is an example- Explain the following to me, no generalizing.
-general relativity
-sonoluminescence
-magnetohydrodynamics
-E=mc(sq)
The fact is 99% of people have no idea, so how the hell would they know what is or is not possible? So they state opinion as fact based on what there Daddy told them, what there teacher told them, outdated textbooks and opinionated media.
I could explain all these 20 years ago, so how would I convince someone having zero knowledge what is or is not possible, you can't.
Sorry for jumping on merv, Im stressed out again,Big time.
As far as his machine goes I have zero interest in building executive toys thank you.
When I see circiuts I gain perspective, like harti's picture, you look at it and say " now why would he do that?" I have seen thousands of circuits everyone uses, most are a joke, everyones pinning caps to common ground, series resistors, voltage regs burning half the power as heat, so when I see something different you learn.
As well you may not have figured this out, but OU isn't all about power generated, it's about efficiency,"what you don't waste". A machine that can run on very little power is very interesting even if it has no value.
Thanks for your reply Peter.
I?ve just looked at all the posts here. Allcanadian was thinking by no 96 and was getting hotter by 134 I?m inspired again. Remember I did two separate things. I build an efficient movement then removed the battery. I did not consider the solenoid coil as part of the tuned circuit , Dipole etc ?.. Just considered it part of the motor not part of the supply .. Of course when I had to introduce large fields to get it to work that?s when the bare bones motor evolved into the device you see now..Then I pursued more normal interests.? So Allcanadian, your mission today. Should you choose to accept it. Make the Adams/Merv motor and show it all if you wish. For the less motivated just start with a piece of wire 2 bits of paper and a computer fan just out of view from the camera. I bet someone will do this. For the rest of you just use a battery But Allcanadian and Peter. I expect much more from you 2
Why do you not discuss the Finsrud machine. I don?t expect to convince Poor old Omnibus. He has already visited the Guru and became a disciple. I just wonder did he think to take a $2.00 compass with him as he walked round the device and felt a chill in his bones.. Oh yes Finsruds device produces much more than a ball moving in a circle. How much money does it generate? I would like to see the video. I should keep quite from now on. Does anyone have the number of the patient office? I think I seethe men in white coats coming up the drive way
Hello Merv if your machines Rf then you use a tank circuit to recieve, diodes to rectify, cap to store charge, reed switch to break contact on register of magnet, recycle Bemf to small cap , because caps are about voltage- small spike+small cap=large voltage/small spike+large cap=low voltage. Voltage flows from high to low, but a watt of power can be at any voltage.
I would love to build your machine, but unfortunately I have a hot new PM/toroid design Im itching to try. I read my posts here as well, If I wasn't a guy I would say I have PMS.
You will see my new design here soon with data hopefully.
Best regards
Great Allcan. I cant wait to see your results. Im still thinking about the Finsrud effort
The Finsrud machine.
Well what if it?s a genuine machine. Where is the energy coming from. Consider a free swinging pendulum sitting at the equator. It sits there and swings. Put it at the north pole and I traces out a circle once every 24 hrs . Put some dominos in its path and you?ve got a clock. But that?s all. No free energy . The earth has moved> Don?t forget Finsrud built his sculpture on a foundation which is spinning round the sun at a million miles an hour. Surley I don?t have to type all this to you. Is there nowhere on the WWW where we can cut and paste this line of thought..??
@ Mramos
You need look in to replicating the linnard patent experiment 13. Hydrogen on demand is here and I believe it is a overunity system because the chemistry is endothermic in nature, which means it uses more heat then it produces. A chemist known here as resin rat has been working on this theory already, but I will be working on this with the use of a fuel cell soon. Then I can determine the exact power havested and if it is enough to reduce the anode and provide useful power at the same time.
@ Merv
I hope to find the schematics to replicate you motor one day, I would love to put one in my server room at the office as a conversation piece. Have you considered using linear audio amps powered by the the same RF they amplify? I would think a four antena array collecting different frequencies could allow for a vast inprovement. Lots of active frequencies in our busy world... I live in tempe and I cant go any where without hitting wifi hotspots (2.4GHz) everywhere. Cellphone frequencies? 60hz? http://www.csgnetwork.com/tvfreqtable.html We're surrounded by it...
Congrats on the invention though. It really is much more then a exectutive ball clicker, but only if you can tune it to run without your brodcast... Why not try a EMF spike thats everywhere? Good luck on your current works.
~Dingus
.Hello again. I have just found the omnibus thread totaling 3000 + replies. Where have I been all this time? This is so much fun. But guess what .The thread is hosted by the STEORN Dublin guys. This all makes sence now. I am convinced Finsruds machine in genuine No electro magnets etc. This machine demonstrates an over unity of more than 1000000 to 1. In Financial terms at least. That?s why no one will replicate it .the STEORN machine does not have to be proven or tested now..... It just is ?. it Exists .It generates its overunity by public interest and media hype. Surley the STEORN promotion video showing a stepper motor turning a wheel for half a rev must have been a shot from inside their office photocopy machine or was it something else.
I hope you reply to me Omnibus.
The main problem with my machine was poor marketing 15 years ago. Can anyone here help with that now? Why persue Free energy . Real Energy is cheap, until the oil runs out. I still think Finsruds machine is running on some form of dark energy? Its in a basement after all.
>Why persue Free energy . Real Energy is cheap, until the oil runs >out
i think you just answered that question yourself ;)
>I have just found the omnibus thread totaling 3000 + replies. >Where have I been all this time? This is so much fun. But guess >what .The thread is hosted by the STEORN Dublin guys
which thread?
Cliff,
@Merv,
No offense, but the main problem with your machine is that it doesn?t perform the way not few of us expected it to. What most people here expected was to see a self-sustaining machine working at the expense of its own created energy, independent of external energy input.
The basis for the above expectations is that it has already been proven beyond doubt that excess energy can be created and that the principle of conservation of energy can be violated. SMOT does that even when not in a closed loop. A probable example of a working closed loop SMOT is Finsrud?s machine. Unfortunately, Finsrud is uncooperative and there are still some questions remaining regarding its reality as a perpetuum mobile. Note, however, that even if ultimately Finsrud?s machine is proven trivial (not likely) it won?t disprove the violation of the principle by SMOT.
Many of us hoped that your device is another genuine example of a self-sustaining machine whereby the sticky spot problem seemed resolved in quite original a manner. Now that we know your machine is trivial I don?t see at this point what do you expect from it in terms of marketing. Indeed, it can be produced as some kind of an amusement toy but it won?t have the significance many of us expected it to have.
Quote from: Omnibus on November 25, 2006, 12:31:56 AM
@Merv,
No offense, but the main problem with your machine is that it doesn?t perform the way not few of us expected it to. What most people here expected was to see a self-sustaining machine working at the expense of its own created energy, independent of external energy input.
The basis for the above expectations is that it has already been proven beyond doubt that excess energy can be created and that the principle of conservation of energy can be violated. SMOT does that even when not in a closed loop. A probable example of a working closed loop SMOT is Finsrud?s machine. Unfortunately, Finsrud is uncooperative and there are still some questions remaining regarding its reality as a perpetuum mobile. Note, however, that even if ultimately Finsrud?s machine is proven trivial (not likely) it won?t disprove the violation of the principle by SMOT.
Many of us hoped that your device is another genuine example of a self-sustaining machine whereby the sticky spot problem seemed resolved in quite original a manner. Now that we know your machine is trivial I don?t see at this point what do you expect from it in terms of marketing. Indeed, it can be produced as some kind of an amusement toy but it won?t have the significance many of us expected it to have.
Indeed, I second everything that Omnibus is saying...
Had your device actually used the cadaceus-like 'gimmick' cap in accord with the moving magnet to create a stress-type-potential that could charge the cap, THAT would be something...
Once I learned that you designed it to operate on radio waves, I, and I am sure 95% of us here, instantly 'tuned' off your device and moved on. Using a man made radio wave and capturing its minute wattage in a cap to run your device is INTERESTING, but it certainly isn't EXCITING or WORTHWHILE for the people doing EXTENSIVE research into non-man-made OU...
Had you powered it off cosmic waves, THAT would also be something, but it seems that isn't the case. Boiling your device down to what the KEY mechanism for OU is/was, we ONLY see a pickup in the form of a crystal type radio device that uses man-made radio waves, NOT exactly what the afforementioned people are looking for...
Wish you would have not hid the radio wave part of your device in your first video, could have saved 10 bucks...............
.Wish you would have not hid the radio wave part of your device in your first video, could have saved 10 bucks...............
TAO your here looking for the ultimate quest in science. And your upset that you spent ten Bucks. Have you replicated my results yet or are you tryin g to recover your expenditure
Quote from: Merv on November 25, 2006, 01:25:59 AM
.Wish you would have not hid the radio wave part of your device in your first video, could have saved 10 bucks...............
TAO your here looking for the ultimate quest in science. And your upset that you spent ten Bucks. Have you replicated my results yet or are you tryin g to recover your expenditure
LOL,
No, I am not upset AT ALL.
I was merely stating the fact that I could have literally saved 10 bucks, heheh.
I have completely replicated your setup, except for the whole radio wave pickup process, once I learned that, I decided to just continue with some other lines of work I've been doing...
I spent the 10 bucks because YOU didn't say anything about radio waves, and I thought that your process involved scalar waves induced by the GIMMICK and moving magnetic field, which could induce in the non-inductive gimmick a poynting flow, but in hindsight, the wires shouldn't be twisted to allow this, anyway...
No hard feelings, I'm glad I spent the money to test the whole scalar process, but I literally could have saved 10 bucks :P No big deal, for now I know something else that doesn't work, adding that to the mem banks...........
Quote from: Merv on November 24, 2006, 06:00:20 PM
Thanks for your reply Peter.
But Allcanadian and Peter. I expect much more from you 2.
Why do you not discuss the Finsrud machine? I don?t expect to convince poor old Omnibus. He has already visited the Guru and became a disciple. I just wonder did he think to take a $2.00 compass with him as he walked round the device and felt a chill in his bones.. Oh yes Finsruds device produces much more than a ball moving in a circle. How much money does it generate? I would like to see the video. I should keep quite from now on. Does anyone have the number of the patient office? I think I see the men in white coats coming up the drive way.
Hello Mervyn,
my opinion to Mr. Finsrud's perpetuum mobile is, that he uses a tesla transformer (Tesla-Trafo) or a high voltage cell (see nr. 6) into the long stand (column) to move the ball.
Whereupon some things point at:
1. The device is accommodated in a glass showcase, so that nobody can detect the existing high voltage. There are several methods, if one goes near very close to the device.
2. The device stands on a long column that contains the Tesla - Trafo or the high voltage cell. A tesla trafo or the cell (Zamboni - Cell) must be long and slim. Only a slim and long tesla trafo works well and good.
3. The long pendulums (necessary for nothing) are there only to suggest the necessity for the long column (stand) to the viewer.
4. The strange brass cap on the point of the column. Thus sparks and corona discharges are probably prevented. For what should be the cap otherwise present?
5. The strong spiral spring under this cap.
6. It is possible to move a ball by a strong electrical or electromagnetic field (known in physics). Similar devices (seesawing/swinging bird on a perch or bar / see picture), which run many years (20 - 30 years) with special high voltage cells in the columns/stands, already had been invented approximately 200 years ago. The cells were developed by Mr. Zamboni, Italy.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schmalenbach.de%2Fsarah%2Fvogel.gif&hash=2f05a82c148bc7ac2ac4cf3e4d56f81868a59705)
http://www.sparkmuseum.com/PERPMO.HTM (http://www.sparkmuseum.com/PERPMO.HTM)
7. Mr. Finsrud is an action artist, who lives on the incomes, which he obtains by the visitors of his gallery.
8. The device is not a patent pending (not applied for a patent). This is very strange!
But - how mentioned - this is my opinion only.
Best regards
Peter Schmalenbach
@peter_schmalenbach,
I personally visited Finsrud and saw the device. The glass enclosure is just for display. He opens it when he starts the machine and I've seen the machine running while the glass enclosure is open. Also, there have been extensive measurements of telltale electromagnetic signals (a group from Trondheim university has spent a couple of weeks measuring that with very precise equipment). No such signals have been found, so that's out. The bunker the motor is in has been built for other purposes (to store valuables of clients) and to build such a buker one needs special permission from the government. The machine has been in another room before they moved it into the bunker.
There are still some questions remaining but they are not of electrical character. One thing to be excluded is that the machine is not just an efficient redistributor of the initially imparted energy. For this reason one has to replace the original ball with a non-magnetic such and see if deceleration will be observed. This will also exclude a hidden energy source. Also, one of the brake magnets above the track has to be removed while the original ball is running to see if there would be acceleration of the ball. This will confirm production of excess energy. Other redundant measurements are also to be carried out. Unfortunately, Finsrud is not interested in such studies. I don't think he makes a living "on the incomes, which he obtains by the visitors of his gallery" not only because when I was there he waived the charge of 20 Norwegian crowns (about $3) to see the motor; visiting the gallery costs nothing. For one, he runs an art school at another location (in Drobak itself; the gallery is outside Drobak). My impression is that he has been genuinely interested in the matters of perpetuum mobile outside of his artistic interests. He showed me numerous preliminary models which he has made throughout the years, in the course of almost three decades, which have led him to the device we now see.
@ Omnibus
O.K.
Regards
Peter
I still don't believe the red overhead cylinder is a "brake magnet". Think about it, the horseshoe magnet pulls it over the pendulum assisting arm and then the ball is closer to the horseshoe then the cylinder yet it is attacted to the cylinder still, Then once reaching the cylinder that just pulled it away from a larger magnet some how the ball magicly avoids any sticky zone. That can only be accomplished by a semi variable field like what is achived with self charging dry pile or high voltage cell. If you can explain how the ball is not stopped or picked up by the "brake magnet", I would love to hear your theory.
@Dingus Mingus,
The sticky spot is overcome by removing the attracting horse-shoe magnet just at the right moment by a clever construction with pendulums. That is how the sticky spot is overcome in SMOT but instead of the ball dropping from the ramp here the magnet is moved away from the ball. Unfortunately, it causes the ball to accelerate which gets it off the track. This acceleration is prevented by placing the small magnets above the track at the right places after the horse-shoe magnets.
So then your hypothysis is that the arms that move the stator magnets on the ring accelerate the ball. The ammount of energy that is attracting the ball is used moving the magnet out of alignment. think of it like pulling a magnet off of a fridge, the magnet is attracted to the metal and it takes energy to pull it away. Trust me many inventors have tried moving a magnet with an arm to create energy. I have though about this device for a long time and have found no evidence that its the horse shoe magnets accomplishing the observed effects.
No, the attraction by the horse-shoe magnets accelerates the ball. There is, however, also another factor ? the gravitational field. Two fields are at play here ? magnetic and gravitational ? just as in SMOT. In Finsrud?s device the gravitational field is cleverly involved through the three outside pendulums. As I said, it is like three inverted SMOTs, at that in a closed loop.
Hello omnibus,
Looking at your google video has shown we are looking at a very clever and indeed mostly, mechanical movement, certainly as near to perfection as anyone has got yet.. There is so much movement here and plenty of synchronizing as the ball turns that the device will always run in harmony . It is not clear if the rails or even one rail are gently oscillating so that the ball is always falling ( panning for gold 200yrs ago has produced little balls which move in a circle by this method) If that is giving the ball motion and surely the horse shoe magnets in sync could make that happen Mr Finsrud did say the magnets act like springs. Not a scientific answer . However the gentleman was just talking to your average member of the public at the time.. . The over head magnets are the speed governers in the system. And there are beautiful feedback loops in the entire design The click sounds too loud for a slight imperfection on the track. A perfect machine but its creator has not got the time to fix it with a little piece of sandpaper?? (clockwork release of stored energy in that central spring) if that?s too simple what about a RAIL GUN effect. Or surly there are electro magnet forces which could add energy to the swinging pendulums. A few well placed solenoids near the Base of the device could achieve this. There are so many other magnetic fields produced by the amount of movement in the mech that the addition of a few man made shots in the arm might not be detected. Surley any graphs produced by scientific tests on the fields surrounding the device would produce such perfect rhythmic harmony ,they would be a thing of beauty in them selves and should be available to view. When things look too good to be true they usually are . Mr Finsrud?s device is alluring to look upon. I might not even want to know its secrets now. It is still art imitating science or perhaps having a giggle at it .The real answer to where the driving force of this sculpture could be so obvious we just can?t see it. Please reply Omnibus with my question about the rail been in motion. Thanks
Regards Merv.
The autor removed in YouTube the Movie of "unusual motor design". Is possible to find a copy ?
And the movie autor is in this forum ?
Ciao
Adriano
Hello Adriano. I removed the video as it was generating too much unwanted spam in my inbox. I still have a copy Perhaps icould arrange a copy for you. Have you read this entire thread yet? This exercise has been well worth while. My creativte ideas have been rekindled. So thats been worth while, for me at least
Hello Merv,
Thanks for responding with your reasoning for removing the videos from YouTube. I understand the spam issue completely having my own website for 10+years.
Anyway, I'm responding to ask if you would be willing to provide me a copy of the 'unusual motor design' video clip so I can look at it more closely. I only saw it once before it was taken down.
You can email it to me if you want: andydidge@pacbell.net
Thanks. I would really like to watch it again...maybe even build one :)
-Andy
I just went through a few posts here and something caught my eye. Merv had mentioned that the steorn device had a stepper motor moving the rotor in 1/2 turn increments. This would make perfect sense in a 2 pole machine- A rotor comes into register inducing current in a coil-But when the coil tries to leave register the induced forward current holds it back-this is the work component. So why not stop the rotor completely in register until all forward current has stopped-brilliant! There can be no induction backdrag if there is no current flow, the stepper motor then pushes the rotor out of register- and according to conventional wisdom the stepper motor input to remove the magnet must closely equal the stator coil output so this portion of the cycle is a wash, the approach to register is clearly a gain.
So once again everyone has missed what should be obvious, you change the operating parameters-STOP the rotor at register. My journey began with a simple question- Exactly where is the work required in conventional motors and generators? a simple question few people can correctly answer, I know this because it took me months to get it, and Im no slouch in EM theory.
This is why this forum is priceless, we comment-add our perspective and we all gain. Merv made a comment which led me to a conclusion I had never considered, which now after the fact seems so obvious.
Quote from: allcanadian on December 10, 2006, 12:19:06 PM
So once again everyone has missed what should be obvious, you change the operating parameters-STOP the rotor at register. My journey began with a simple question- Exactly where is the work required in conventional motors and generators?
Ok, you stop the rotor at register. Then the speed of the rotor cannot be really fast because of the move-stop-move-stop sequence and from this it comes the induced voltage in the coils (hence output power) cannot be really high. How can you make it big this is now I ponder on? By using very strong magnets and many turns of wire?
One more thing I do not get:
Quote from: allcanadian on December 10, 2006, 12:19:06 PM
- and according to conventional wisdom the stepper motor input to remove the magnet must closely equal the stator coil output so this portion of the cycle is a wash, the approach to register is clearly a gain.
If this is so, where is OU? Sorry to not get it yet. You indicate a fifty-fifty share...
rgds
Gyula
Hello Allcanadian,
Have you had time to replicate the Adams Mervace Motor Yet? re your thoughts on the Stroen guys. Im glad to have generated a new angle of thought for you but I really was just poking fun at them. I don't think they have an OU machine they are just in Business.Monkey Business I think... I really thought their video showed the inside of a photo copy machine :) and nothing else. If they had something, the scientific community would be on their side. Its 2006 and we all know the oils running out soon
Hello Merv
Im not sure what to think about steorn, what I do know is I built a 3 magnet LEMA- 3 neo's on a washer with a rotating "C" type shield which I posted the diagram for, and it does work with minimal input as long as the shield stays in the magnetic field. Other than this I am speculating at what they are doing and what may work.
I think I was wrong in my last post, I believe the LEMA is there core technology and it basically cercumvents Lenz law and backdrag. Here is my thought- if unity is 100% efficiency in a conventional generator and the Lenz force or backdrag accounts for let's say 30% on the input, then what happens when the backdrag is removed?
So I am led to believe that they are useing a rotary LEMA like the one I posted and they drive the shield with a stepper motor. The question is why the start/stop motion? the answer I believe is because when a magnet is exposed by the shield and current is induced in the coil in front of it, this creates backdrag on the shield as it must. So they hold the shield until all current flow has stopped, as measured by there electronics, only then do they move the shield forward. I think they got this idea from AL Francoeur's interferrence generator which is based on the Ecklin generator, neither work as stated because the induced forward current in the coils always pulls back on the shield, so the backdrag has to go.
I am guessing here as always based on what has been observed and what steorn has stated.
I remember watching the steorn video and the stepper motor stopping/starting and nothing clicked until you mentioned it. I guess the best place to hide something is in plain sight.
Me noT so sMart sUmtime.
I forgot to mention, check out Harti's link to the Lutec website and read the "how it works" section. This is new to me and a very interesting read, so the Lutec is a modified adams motor. Also in the middle of the first page they state"the electron flow in the DC circuit is negative to positive", so they use electron flow models as I always have, many people don't understand this. Electron flow is all that matters it dictates everything else in the circuit, so I think they know there stuff very well. I think everything we need to know relates to the Lutec and steorn technologies, Im still trying to put all the pieces together though, maybe incorperate the best of both worlds.
I have a copy of the first video. Has anyone a copy of the second video?
Dave