Has anyone thought of this? The pure magnet motors designs always fail because they find equilibrium. Well, if for example, we have a number of magnets on a stator that is prime, and a number of magnets on the rotor which is prime, in theory there can be no equilibrium. There will always be an imbalance because the force can't be evenly distrbuted. Heres a link with a list of prime numbers:
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0876084.html Can't have too many theories, now can we?
Hi,
imagine a rotor with two(prime number) magnets on it both with south poles facing out. Now a stator with three(prime number) magnets on it, with south poles facing in. there will be three places where the rotor will find equilibrium.
@ryan: good idea, keep your imagination going! but how to apply? in revolutions of a wheel at least at the point of restarting the series, there is a sticky point and it rests there. but who knows? maybe other configuration could take advantage of prime-numbers-combinations...
More food for thought. This guy at Steorn.com seems to think fibonacci numbers might be significant.
http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=58463&page=8#Item_50
the equilibruim is (with rotary systems) not dependant upon the total energy values of each wheel, but rather the total energy values of the two strongest opposing magnets in the system.
if they are all equal on each wheel, then it can be between any of them, the equilibrium is found at the "magnetic center", which is approximated at lines of flux divided by two
if the magnets on both wheels are identicle this will be the physical "center" of distance between the two sticky points of opposing magnets and the pair of opposing magnets that is next on the wheels.
the only exception to this that i know of is in the case of linear magnetic propulsion. where in the "sticky" points are elongated and more powerful on one end then on the other, conversly the "pushing" force of the linear motor is stronger on the opposite end
i have thought about combining a linear propulsion systen to a wheel in such a way that it arcs out before the sticky point. perhaps prime numbers could play into that somewhow...
Quote from: rotorhead on September 18, 2007, 10:54:12 PM
More food for thought. This guy at Steorn.com seems to think fibonacci numbers might be significant.
http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=58463&page=8#Item_50
WHOPEE, the Fibonacci effect again,
Will someone PLEASE tell me what the f***ing thing is??
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: hansvonlieven on September 19, 2007, 05:11:22 AM
WHOPEE, the Fibonacci effect again,
Will someone PLEASE tell me what the f***ing thing is??
Hans von Lieven
Simply put, the fifth number in the series will be the third
added to the fourth. And the twenty seventh will be the
twenty fifth + the twenty sixth. And so on.
The odd thing is that this bizarre series, 0,1,1,2,3,5,8, ....etc etc
crops up in nature left, right and centre.
Paul.
something i remember from app math, a fibonacci magnetic system is "chaotic" on the quantum level.
not sure if that helps us or works agianst us here.. but might be worth giving some study into.
G'day all,
I KNOW what the Fibonacci series is, what I want to know is what is the Fibonacci effect as applied to magnetic fields that they talk about here and in other posts.
Any takers?
Hans von Lieven
as i remember it, the magnetic forces on a quantum level (being chaotic) have a greater chance for tunnelling to occur, thus producing random imbalances in the magnetic field that constantly have to re-adjust themselves.
in theory, the changes in quantum-magnetic flux should induce a voltage in a coil - without physical motion.
however, creating a coil the size of a series of molecules, would be somewhat challenging.
im not sure how the effect translates into newtonian physics.
I've always pictured a working model to be one that needs quite a bit of energy to start. For example, if a rotary model is to work, I envision a rotor having to be pressed into the stator from the side-or, like that Parendev video (and I don't think he has anything there) two clam shell type deals coming together. So, the re-gauging issue doesn't really come into play, because I believe if coming from the side it will take about a third the amount in ft lbs to press a rotor in from the side (like on a splined shaft) total torque created on the axle. So, if the machine made 90 ft lbs, it would take about 30 ft lbs to press the rotor into the stator, then it would self accelerate to whatever maximum speed that set up will achieve. I mean, if you think about it, a rotary version will be hard to assemble because the damn thing is going to want to fly apart, assuming we are taking advantage of the repel force. So, what I'm saying is, if one were to build a working model, the thing will not stop unless the magnets can be moved far enough away to no longer influence each other.
that's what brakes are for