Video :
https://youtu.be/RCjekus9zLM
When magnetic field on the surface of a ring magnet is compressed using a small disc magnet with repelling pole, the steel plate fixed on the surface of ring magnet is attracted towards compressed magnetic field area. If oscillations of compression by disc magnet is synchronized with ring magnet movement, then the magnet rotates continuously.
If you conduct the experiment, you will see that, at higher speeds, the force required to move the disc magnet becomes very less. if this force is less than the force with which the steel plate is pulled towards compressed magnetic field area, then it will lead to overunity. It is very difficult to synchronize the movement of disc magnet with rotation of ring magnet by hand because it attains high speed if field is fully compressed. If it is mechanized like a V Gate, then the motion of ring magnet may become perpetual.
Hmm what happens if there is a steel plate on top of the ring magnet? Does it still work?
If it touches twice it makes 2 compressed field junctions
You can also use a 2nd smaller magnet instead of steel
Or just 2 magnets opposite the bearing instead of ring
Or 8 in a circle and a small lever w mag
Or.... any field topology other than horizontal
Quote from: Belfior on January 30, 2018, 06:01:13 PM
Hmm what happens if there is a steel plate on top of the ring magnet? Does it still work?
https://youtu.be/M6FyfU2C724
When a steel plate is placed on ring magnet, it absorbs the flux of ring magnet hence we will not get strong compressed field and it will not work.
As smoky2 said if two small magnets are placed on either side of bearing, it becomes a case of normal repulsion. Whatever force is supplied by hand is converted to rotation of the wheel.
The idea of using ring magnet is, both compressed field and steel plate remain on the wheel itself and steel plate is attracted towards compressed field caused by two magnets, i.e, the ring magnet and the magnet in hand whereas we have to move only the magnet in hand. Hence there is a chance of steel plate being attracted to compressed field with twice the force required to move the magnet in hand for compression which will lead to overunity.
If placed on a mechanical lever, two things happen
1) you remove the unknown variable of "hand"
And 2) the drive magnet becomes fixed along a set path.
which eliminates circumferential oscillations of the drive magnet
providing more rotational torque.
Overunity is not observed by hand, because you spend more energy trying
to hold the magnet still, than it takes to rotate the wheel.
You have to think in terms of Howard Johnson magnetics
As the magnet approaches the compression field it attracts
As it leaves it pushes the magnet back up
With the large piece of steel, the magnet can be attracted to the steel
which may cause problems, but placement and timing can dodge that situation
The function is in the field compression
Or change in flux over distance
If you think in terms of "field lines", there are more lines of flux in the compressed
part of the field, than there are in the relaxed (expanded) part of the field.
Magnets are always attracted to the point of lowest magnetic potential.
That is the most "lines of flux" per area, over the shortest distance.
They are repelled, to the point of greatest magnetic potential.
That is the least "lines of flux" per area, over the greatest (effective) distance.
Attract in, repel out.
Essential function of a magnetic gate.
The magnetic portion is not constrained by thermodynamics.
There is no time in the equation.
Energy includes time.
The mechanical portion is always entropic.
This is where people fail.
In a direct "OU" approach, the system should be designed such that
Entropy < Negentropy
Magnetic translational force over distance, must be greater than frictional losses
and other resistances in the system. (including undesirable magnetic effects)
Quote from: sm0ky2 on February 03, 2018, 08:47:37 AM
Attract in, repel out.
Essential function of a magnetic gate.
You are very correct. I am trying it that way. In any magnet track, with whatever force the magnets pull in while approaching, with same force they pull back while leaving, which makes magnetic field conservative. Hence if that 'pull back' force is eliminated (repelled out), overunity is achieved. But unfortunately it is not so easy to achieve it. Have to try my luck.
You have to construct something mechanical which use part of kinetic energy of v-gate to mechanically push magnet outside the attraction force.
I am building a magnet motor that is kind of a V-gate, but circular. O-gate :)
I figured that with mechanical devices you always got friction, gravity and air to fight against, so what you need to always do it accelerate. So I have a rotor being built that has magnets on it in a yin yang shape. Magnet on stator is N towards the rotor cylinder and rotor magnets are also facing N towards the stator magnet. Then you get cogging when the rotor has turned half a turn, because the closest N magnet is coming up on the next half turn. I am planning to use an electromagnet here to overcome this.
S-Neodymium stator magnet-N -> electromagnet -> N-rotormagnet-S
So the stator magnet has the electromagnet magnetized 99% of the time so that it has N facing the rotor.
I will use another disc on the axle that has coils and magnet to generate electricity. I am going to control the timing with reed switches so, that when the next half turn N pole is approaching my stator N I will blast the electromagnet with all the electricity I gained from the collecting disc&coils. Electromagnet will turn to S and pull the closest N pole on top of it. Then the current is cut off and the stator magnet N will immediately re-gauge the electromagnet as N. This will hopefully use the rotor momentum to push the wheel on the next half turn and so on and so on.
I have built some magnetic bearings, so the whole shaft&discs are floating freely.
If I get this rotating I have proofed that the Universe does allow us to take electricity from the ambient. There are no batteries, which always kinda makes you wonder if a device is OU or not.
If this works the acceleration will stop at some RPM. The next step is to use the Lorentz force the gain more speed. There a lot of fields so I might be able to place wires so, that Lorentz helps with the rotation.
People always say that "Lentz this and Lentz that", but why use looped coils? If I can light up LEDs with open ended coils there has to be something flowing in open ended cables.
Quote from: vineet_kiran on February 03, 2018, 09:08:02 AM
You are very correct. I am trying it that way. In any magnet track, with whatever force the magnets pull in while approaching, with same force they pull back while leaving, which makes magnetic field conservative. Hence if that 'pull back' force is eliminated (repelled out), overunity is achieved. But unfortunately it is not so easy to achieve it. Have to try my luck.
Field conservation is a timeless-vectored property.
With a symmetrical field, the force is conservative over time.
Because the changes in the field over distance are symmetrical.
When field compression is employed, this factor takes on a different
form.
The change in field over distance can be interacted with via momentum.
Moving through the field adds a time dimension outside of the field.
It's hard to think about time as being a dimensional aspect of our reality
But in magnetism, it presents itself in a testable way.
Time can be shown to exist completely separate, within a magnetic field.
Field assymetry can direct chronological translation in the 3 physical dimensions.
In discretely controlled experiments, it is demonstrated that inertial forces exist
separate from magnetic force (repulsion or attraction).
Even when the magnetic force has complete gravitational control over an object.
Knowing this, we must consider inertia and momentum, even in cyclical/vibratory states.
As a separate force function, that carries through in recombination calculations.
This is demonstrated in a linear gate by comparison of rolling and fixed active components.
a rolling rotor carries rotational momentum components not present in the fixed-position rotor.
even when translational velocity is the same, the rolling member has different translational energy.
gravitational force plays a large part in that interaction as well.
there is another function that appears mathematically at a point beyond maximum compression.
where fluxpolarity becomes a negative number ^4 stronger than the compressed field.
HJ called this "flipping" the magnets.
Essentially a highly-compressed N pole becomes a S pole (^4) momentarily.
it is an internal function of the magnet, and reverts as soon as compression decreases.
While the specific aspects of this technology are classified, I am allowed to discuss the publicly
known mathematical theory that underlies it.
But I think HJ does a better job, so i'll refer you to the inventor if you want to learn that.
Most of the things we play with do not compress the field to this extent.
But I know a few of you are getting into 3-d printed magnets and custom field engineering
Which is more than capable of performing this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZWM0xN3yCw
Is it self running?
https://youtu.be/EYn71sRCPto (https://youtu.be/EYn71sRCPto)
Looks interesting
each ramp has its own magnet
Which could lead to independent drive functions
The orientation of the stator mags leads to some ?'s
That particular video looks like it has a "jump" in it where the video may be looped to make it look like it's continually running.
The LED tells me two possible things. Electricity is involved that may be generated by the device or being supplied to the device to keep it spinning.
Science says it's not possible so that doesn't go well in its favor.
Having said all of that, I tried a V-gate for a little bit. Nothing fancy just a small strip on the floor with a row of magnets with washers on the ends so it could roll on the floor. I recall the washer part rolling over the gate and exiting the gate due to how heavy it was. I turned the gate 180 degrees and had the same result so it didn't appear to be on much of a slope if any. While I doubt the video one works, if I was to try building something similar, I would do so such that the outer diameter of the device is weighted light a flywheel. Still most likely would not work but that's the direction I would start in if I tried the concept again. To many other projects going at the moment and I determined that this method would not produce enough power for my spacecrafts.
Video :
https://youtu.be/3Tb8l7tBcn0 (https://youtu.be/3Tb8l7tBcn0)
I added one more repelling magnet on the other side of steel plate so that the plate will not be pulled back after crossing the top oscillating magnet. Don't know whether the torque gained by ring magnet is enough to lift the oscillating magnet before it drops by the side of additional repelling magnet.
I think if you use one rotor that has magnets from the outer surface towards the center, you get accelerating movement. When you go full circle there is the cogging point, where you need to get over the first magnet again. I think the rotor works as a flywheel and it overcomes the cogging maybe even without the electromagnet. Magnet opposes magnet, but the flywheel rotor adds a force to overcome the cogging
Quote from: Belfior on November 08, 2018, 08:57:04 AM
I think if you use one rotor that has magnets from the outer surface towards the center, you get accelerating movement. When you go full circle there is the cogging point, where you need to get over the first magnet again. I think the rotor works as a flywheel and it overcomes the cogging maybe even without the electromagnet. Magnet opposes magnet, but the flywheel rotor adds a force to overcome the cogging
Whatever may be the arrangement of magnets, unless 'ON' and 'OFF' of the flux is created with respect to the rotor, it is not possible to generate energy. I am trying to find other methods of creating 'ON' and 'OFF' of the magnetic flux.
well I mean that one wheel is used for accelerating rotation and other wheel for collecting energy with coils. This other wheel can have the magnets which ever way you want
Quote from: Belfior on February 04, 2018, 08:48:06 AM
...If I can light up LEDs with open ended coils there has to be something flowing in open ended cables.
"Something" is displacement current.
The end of the coil and the conductors of the LEDs constitute the two "plates" of a small capacitor. When voltage and frequency are high, the impedance of the small capacitor is low enough for a current to pass through the air dielectric and to light LEDs, as AC does in any capacitor.
Quote from: F6FLT on November 11, 2018, 12:19:47 PM
"Something" is displacement current.
The end of the coil and the conductors of the LEDs constitute the two "plates" of a small capacitor. When voltage and frequency are high, the impedance of the small capacitor is low enough for a current to pass through the air dielectric and to light LEDs, as AC does in any capacitor.
This is NOT true.
Capacitor can be monopole.
Also, this so-called displacement current occurs in open-ended conductor as well.
Quote from: Belfior on February 04, 2018, 08:48:06 AM
....
People always say that "Lentz this and Lentz that", but why use looped coils? If I can light up LEDs with open ended coils there has to be something flowing in open ended cables.
You are right. The surface wave is flowing.
Surface wave is a wave propagating at speed lower than the speed of light. Basically, anything with a bit of conductivity can sustain propagation of surface wave.
Quote from: blueplanet on November 12, 2018, 06:56:31 AM
This is NOT true.
Capacitor can be monopole.
Also, this so-called displacement current occurs in open-ended conductor as well.
"There is no "open-ended conductor", except in the minds of people who are not familiar with physics and electronics.
Any charge in a conductor remotely influences the charges of other conductors in the surroundings, even the orbital electrons of the atoms of any material, including insulators.
Any movement of charges at the end of an apparently "open-ended" conductor is accompanied by a redistribution of surrounding charges everywhere around it, which is equivalent to a current flowing from the "open-ended" conductor to other conductors through air or vacuum, exactly as through the dielectric of a capacitor. It is named "displacement current". A conductor is never really "open", it is always capacitively coupled to its surroundings. It's easy to verify: the hand near the open end of a tuned circuit changes the resonance frequency because it changes the (low) coupling capacity.
Did you at least conduct the experiment and the measurements?!
That's what I did. And I measured that current is drawn from the generator when the LEDs are lit remotely from an apparently open end of a coil.
It is well-known electronics. This is a problem for RF engineers because they often have to shield circuits that, although separate, are capacitively coupled (without real capacitor) to remote areas of high potential in the same equipment.
There is no capacitor monopole. For instance a single spherical conductor has really a capacity. But this capacity is calculated as this of a spherical capacitor with two concentric electrode ( C= 4*π*Ɛ0*R1*R2/(R1-R2) ), one being located at infinity therefore C reduces to C = 4*π*Ɛ0*R when R2->∞. In real life, the second electrode is not at infinity but is the surroundings as explained.
The universe is neutral and any change in the distribution of charges somewhere leads to a redistribution of all other charges by minimizing the potential energy.
it is a waste of time to debate with a believer. For both of them.
What you are talking about is the closed circuit theory taught in high schools. What is missing in the ordinary closed circuit circuit theory is the electrostatic waves or magnetic waves which can self-loop around the wire or over a surface. With this in mind, the energy can propagate without an opposite charges in the receiving end. For this reason, it is impossible to predict the behavior of open-ended conductor using conventional SPICE-like simulator or the like.
Open-ended transmission line has nothing to do with your theory. It has nothing to do with conventional resonance concept either. I am sorry about that.
Quote from: F6FLT on November 13, 2018, 10:51:44 AM"There is no "open-ended conductor", except in the minds of people who are not familiar with physics and electronics.
Any charge in a conductor remotely influences the charges of other conductors in the surroundings, even the orbital electrons of the atoms of any material, including insulators.
Any movement of charges at the end of an apparently "open-ended" conductor is accompanied by a redistribution of surrounding charges everywhere around it, which is equivalent to a current flowing from the "open-ended" conductor to other conductors through air or vacuum, exactly as through the dielectric of a capacitor. It is named "displacement current". A conductor is never really "open", it is always capacitively coupled to its surroundings. It's easy to verify: the hand near the open end of a tuned circuit changes the resonance frequency because it changes the (low) coupling capacity.
Did you at least conduct the experiment and the measurements?!
That's what I did. And I measured that current is drawn from the generator when the LEDs are lit remotely from an apparently open end of a coil.
It is well-known electronics. This is a problem for RF engineers because they often have to shield circuits that, although separate, are capacitively coupled (without real capacitor) to remote areas of high potential in the same equipment.
There is no capacitor monopole. For instance a single spherical conductor has really a capacity. But this capacity is calculated as this of a spherical capacitor with two concentric electrode ( C= 4*π*Ɛ0*R1*R2/(R1-R2) ), one being located at infinity therefore C reduces to C = 4*π*Ɛ0*R when R2->∞. In real life, the second electrode is not at infinity but is the surroundings as explained.
The universe is neutral and any change in the distribution of charges somewhere leads to a redistribution of all other charges by minimizing the potential energy.
Also, if there is any measurable current, your meter must have problems.
Quote from: F6FLT on November 13, 2018, 10:51:44 AM
Did you at least conduct the experiment and the measurements?!
That's what I did. And I measured that current is drawn from the generator when the LEDs are lit remotely from an apparently open end of a coil.
It is well-known electronics. This is a problem for RF engineers because they often have to shield circuits that, although separate, are capacitively coupled (without real capacitor) to remote areas of high potential in the same equipment.
To the uneducated, everything seems like magic. So they make up mystical explanations for what they don't understand.
Who is to blamed?
Me, Marconi, Tesla, Guobau or our high school teachers?
Quote from: citfta on November 16, 2018, 06:00:08 AM
To the uneducated, everything seems like magic. So they make up mystical explanations for what they don't understand.
It's really, really true. I've made the same observation so many times!
Among the uneducated, this only concerns people of low ability who don't know but give explanations because they have illusory superiority (they cannot objectively evaluate their actual competence or incompetence). The other ignorant people, of which we are all more or less, know their limits and when they are facing the unknown, they study first and check the facts.
and if the system that educated you was created to hide something, then you are in trouble. You are perfectly fine using a nail as a hammer, because it seems to work and there is a formula for it.
We still need intuition and people that do brainstorming. Sure some of the ideas are just crap, but at least it is something new. After you get the crazy idea you go test it. This cannot happen if you start out with an end result = "there is no free energy", because after that everything you see is evidence for that case. You come up with one end result that matches your predefined end result and you say "HAH! The result matches my belief, so there is no free energy. Crazy people proven to be crazy once more!" This leaves out every "what if?" you could have also done with all your knowledge, but you didn't.
Having a crucifix or diploma on your wall is pretty much the same thing. You were told something and you now preach it as gospel.
I cannot understand all the debunkers on this forum. Go play World of Tanks, if there is no free energy. Why waste your time here trying to prove to people something that is absolutely true already?
This one scientist in YT said "there cannot ever be any science that comes out of revelation". I disagree. You need to pop out of the matrix first and see the cosmos for what it is. That is revelation and directly related to the ideas you can come up with. That leads to scientific testing and actual results.
Hi again Belfior,
I have spent most of the last ten years researching and looking for any device that can produce more power than it takes to run the device. I am still searching. I do believe it might be possible to build such a device. I also believe that such a device might be impossible to build. So I keep trying and looking. I am well aware that none of us knows everything. But I firmly believe the more we know the better our chances of discovering something new.
However there are many people on this forum that clearly have not taken the time to even begin to learn the basics of physics and especially electronics. So they are constantly coming to this forum to post their "great" new discovery. When all they have discovered was already discovered by someone else many years before. Because they don't even know the basics they think their idea must be something new and radical. I belong to two other forums similar to this one. One of them only allows you to join after a member there can vouch for the fact you actually know what you are doing and are willing to help others.
I have spent many hours on this and the other forums trying to help those that want to learn. I have no patience for the know-it-alls that don't know what they are talking about. It is pretty easy to tell which ones are which. If you ask technical questions the pretend know-it-alls will attack you as a person. The people that really do know what they are talking about will answer your questions with technical information or admit they don't know why they got the results they got. The second type will also suggest ways for you to investigate their claims.
Take care,
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on November 21, 2018, 11:43:00 AM
Hi again Belfior,
I have spent most of the last ten years researching and looking for any device that can produce more power than it takes to run the device. I am still searching. I do believe it might be possible to build such a device. I also believe that such a device might be impossible to build. So I keep trying and looking. I am well aware that none of us knows everything. But I firmly believe the more we know the better our chances of discovering something new.
However there are many people on this forum that clearly have not taken the time to even begin to learn the basics of physics and especially electronics. So they are constantly coming to this forum to post their "great" new discovery. When all they have discovered was already discovered by someone else many years before. Because they don't even know the basics they think their idea must be something new and radical. I belong to two other forums similar to this one. One of them only allows you to join after a member there can vouch for the fact you actually know what you are doing and are willing to help others.
I have spent many hours on this and the other forums trying to help those that want to learn. I have no patience for the know-it-alls that don't know what they are talking about. It is pretty easy to tell which ones are which. If you ask technical questions the pretend know-it-alls will attack you as a person. The people that really do know what they are talking about will answer your questions with technical information or admit they don't know why they got the results they got. The second type will also suggest ways for you to investigate their claims.
Take care,
Carroll
Hi Carroll,
Very good answer and I totally respect your views and also the work you have done. I also agree that education and hands on experience can save you a lot of time and can guide you towards something new, but it all depends are you also a good researcher or not. Sometimes I just feel that the more learned the person is the more they are locked inside their own framework and that might hinder any results they might be able to achieve. You lose objectivity and your experiments try to prove that it is impossible. Because that is what your other experiments proved.
Now my intuition tells me that free energy should be the norm and burning oil to get energy is just absurd. Even the atom works without a power plug, until it disappears when it radiates to space. Solar system is another. It should run until the Sun dies.
So since this research seems to be very slow, I started from the premise that there is active suppression which also means that the school system is in on it. This becomes obvious when you find out that everything anomalous or fringe is left out and they tell you that P =UxI. They don't tell you anything useful about displacement current or Tesla's patents that depicted something explainable only with quaternion math.
"As an example, Nikola Tesla's patented circuits cannot be properly understood in either a vector EM or tensor EM analysis. However, very novel functions performed in them can be seen in a quaternion EM analysis, as has been clearly shown by Barrett {124}. Any electrodynamicist, who has looked at Tesla's work only in terms of tensor or vector classical electrodynamics, has no concept of what Tesla was actually doing. Since that is precisely how most academics have examined Tesla's work, they have had little idea of the functions he was actually able to accomplish in circuits — functions that U.S. electrical engineering departments still cannot perform."
https://www.freeenergyplanet.biz/energy-from-vacuum/faraday-maxwell-quaternions-and-heaviside.html
So my approach is more "no holds barred" where you come up with an idea first based on my view of the universe. Then I go through the internet to find if someone else had that idea already. I was very pleased to find, that I am not alone with my thoughts and that other crazy people are out there :) Then I read what I can find and do my own tests. Sometimes I find something and sometimes I don't. So I do apologize for blurting out ideas and theories that just will not work, but none the less I will not take "there is no free lunch" or "conservation of energy prevents this" for an answer. The answer is there somewhere and it might be more obvious than we think. We are not just allowed to go there. I think our closed loop circuits will take care of most of the anomalies, that we are actually looking for.
I still believe in the scientific method, but I enter from the back door. Everybody should think out of the box, so more people try out new stuff. Listen to other people. They might have a great idea even if they are crazy. I can debate with people about anything, because I like the back&forth that goes between them. Your view might change a bit, after you listened to their "evidence". They might agree with you, after you present your "evidence". Now we got 2 people that both are wiser than they were in the morning.
and just a side note. We are being told everything is just death and taxes and there is nothing immaterial or that we do not have any special skills like telepathy.
Since I disagree (like CIA also does) I am also going to use everything in my research that "we cannot do". Meditation, hypnosis what ever comes to mind.
Since this is also a big no-no, I will leave these experiments out of this forum
Hi Belfior,
I should have added, that by education I did not mean only formal education. I agree with you completely we should do all the research we can about what others have done before. And a lot of the time that means looking for information that is not included in formal education. My problem with this forum and others is with those people that refuse to even take the time to learn the basics of physics or electronics. It is pretty hard to go exploring unexplored areas if you can't even read a map. In other words how can you know you are exploring an unexplored area if you can't read a map that shows you where the explored areas are?
Take care,
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on November 22, 2018, 10:36:05 AM
Hi Belfior,
I should have added, that by education I did not mean only formal education. I agree with you completely we should do all the research we can about what others have done before. And a lot of the time that means looking for information that is not included in formal education. My problem with this forum and others is with those people that refuse to even take the time to learn the basics of physics or electronics. It is pretty hard to go exploring unexplored areas if you can't even read a map. In other words how can you know you are exploring an unexplored area if you can't read a map that shows you where the explored areas are?
Take care,
Carroll
I can only hope that these people (including me) also do research and not just blurt out stuff without ever really going forward. I feel that I have learned a lot during the 1,5 years, but that is a long way from somebody who has worked in the field for 3 decades. I feel that I can learn the basics and still approach the issue from my point of view. Just keep asking questions and do not accept an answer that does not fully satisfy your problem. I bought an oscilloscope and I have designed and built some devices already for my own research. They save time and they provide the basics I am lacking. It also answers some questions that you did not even ask like "why did the output pin go silent, after I used that to drive a coil and what is that smoke?!?"
It is a big problem in my mind that people just keep posting videos and second hand information, without ever doing any actual research. I think simple circuits and magnet motors are something that anybody can do. Then they will come up with more questions like "will acceleration, gravity and angular momentum be enough to make 2 magnets pass each other".
I was very suspicious to learn, that frequency does not play a part in some of the formulas like ampere's law. Like pulling a saw over your hand once is the same as doing it 30000 times per second. It has to have some effect, if not plain power addition
But then I found out it actually does and Maxwell had to change that law so his theories would work
https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/MaxwellsDisplacementCurrent/
So in circuits containing frequencies, you have to account for displacement current also. Displacement current depends on the rate of change. Well that is exactly what I was trying to say.
My question is:
Can I get more displacement current on the other side of the cap, if I pulse the other side with CMOS 10V DC with 90% duty cycle compared to pulsing it with 10D DV with 50% duty cycle?
Rate of change, at least in my mind, means the magnitude of the change, the slope of the change and the amount of changes (many pulses is "more change" per time unit)
This gets into Tesla's work on disruptive discharge, since he did a lot of work to keep the pulses unipolar and used large caps that can output the power "immediately". Both affect the rate of change