What is absolutely impossible with conventional gears - changing revolutions without changing radius - becomes feasible with magnets!
If you calculate this, you get strange results!
But can this be OU?
The proof, that this works:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MLLn946JyL269QneAwIx60Tv_8RIoSEN/view?usp=sharing
You're going about it wrong. Imagine that the belt is slipping and you will understand how the same thing works on magnets.
If the drive belt is slipping, are you transferring more or less power? This is the same.
Quote from: r2fpl on February 23, 2023, 06:03:09 AM
You're going about it wrong. Imagine that the belt is slipping and you will understand how the same thing works on magnets.
If the drive belt is slipping, are you transferring more or less power? This is the same.
Why did you say it's like a belt slipping? You can see from the video that the white arrows continue to line up in time with each other.
Quote from: citfta on February 23, 2023, 06:37:30 AM
Why did you say it's like a belt slipping? You can see from the video that the white arrows continue to line up in time with each other.
Compare the number of laps. That's why I said it's similar, not the same. The difference is one lap, that's right. You have to look at it differently. A circle is always divided any number of times and it doesn't matter if you divide it by 3 or 4 or billions of times.
I know it puzzles you that the arrows meet in the same place but if you count the laps everything will make sense from the division.
If I'm wrong, how to explain it to see something unusual here. It's not a miracle.
Well I DON"T see anything unusual about what has been shown. The number of turns each gear makes is determined by the number of magnets on each. I don't see any difference between that and a couple of gears. The ration of gear teeth between the gears determines the ratio of turns between them. The only difference is that because the gears have to mesh with each other the diameter of gears has to be correct. But with magnets the diameter doesn't matter as much but the ratio of magnets still determines the ratio of turns between the gears. I don't see that as having any bearing on the efficiency of either system. But I don't see any slippage involved or gain of efficiency either.
Respectfully,
Carroll
I don't see any performance gain here either.
Slippage may not be the right description, but I couldn't think of anything else to describe it.
How many times can I tell you, you will speed up the rotation of the virtual Holcomb magnetic field with this magnetic gear.
If the EMF on the secondary winding is proportional to the speed of rotation, and from nothing else, you will get a multiple increase in power out of nothing.
And even if something will be a little slips there.
Why hasn't anyone tried this yet?
I dont have an opportunity do it.
ok. Answer me the question: is the power on each of these wheels the same? maybe they are different?
Of course, increasing the amplitude will increase the power but not without a fee. Speed alone is not enough to equal power, right? You can always check it too.
Yes, but I was told here on the forum that the consumption from the power source does not increase with increasing frequency ...
I do not know everything. Maybe it's different in this case, but it would have to be something unknown and I find it hard to believe that it only works because someone says so. If you have a device, what is the difficulty to measure the parameters truly. It's easy to show something abnormal and say it works. We know many such constructions and no one has yet confirmed them to get > 1
I do not know a reliable device that we all want to have. There are many people who are convinced that this or that device works but they have not confirmed it, they just repeat it. This is the problem.
Hi,
I find it interesting that Leon Raoul Hatem claims OU with this type of magnetic coupling, even if he is using a 1:1 ratio.
Seems he has many prototypes to support his claims.
This may be a sidestep but I find it a bit similar.
http://www.rexresearch.com/hatem/hatem.htm
Tom
Quote from: r2fpl on February 23, 2023, 01:45:11 PM
I do not know everything. Maybe it's different in this case, but it would have to be something unknown and I find it hard to believe that it only works because someone says so. If you have a device, what is the difficulty to measure the parameters truly. It's easy to show something abnormal and say it works. We know many such constructions and no one has yet confirmed them to get > 1
I do not know a reliable device that we all want to have. There are many people who are convinced that this or that device works but they have not confirmed it, they just repeat it. This is the problem.
I understand your skepticism and it is important to approach any claim of a new device or technology with a critical eye. It is true that there are many claims of devices that purport to produce more energy than they consume, but so far, none have been widely accepted as valid by the scientific community.
In order to validate a new device or technology, rigorous testing and analysis must be conducted, and the results must be reproducible by other independent researchers. This is the standard process for scientific discovery and it helps to ensure that new technologies are safe, reliable, and effective.