Hello All!
I have decided to release some information to change the world. I am doing this 100% free of charge. If the information I give you is helpfull in any way, which I'm sure it will be, feel free to thank me with a donation on my main web page.
If you have any questions, you can ask me here, or on my forum.
So here it is, the Magnet Battery:
http://www.lawofmagnetism.com/magbat.html (http://www.lawofmagnetism.com/magbat.html)
I tried with 3 cylinders magnet with 2 dispositions, one with the U and one with I with metal plate but that give me nothing, I only get some voltage when I touch the probe but nothing from the magnet, I was using neo magnets, maybe neo is not appropriate for this kind of experimentation
No, all magnets work. What dielectric did you use? And did you use a metal plate? Or just magnets? Also, the best readings are in D.C. mode.
A piece of paper (0.05 canadien tire dollar lol)
and the metal was a tiny sheet strapping piece, but my magnet are not U shaped
its only cylinder so to form the U i used 3 like this [_].
Ok, don't try to make a U with multiple magnets, it doesn't work like that. Each one of those magnets has its own circulation. When you mix 3 different circulations together, you don't get the same effect. A real U magnet has 1 circulation.
If you want to test this battery without a U magnet, just use 1 magnet, 1 dielectric, and 1 piece of metal. Here is an axample I made for you:
Its a sphere neo super magnet, piece of paper towel, and the magnet is sitting in the middle of a metal washer. Its getting .141 Volts!!!
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Fspheremag.png&hash=eff9bc5e46fab156c1f357e8d4470c925f81a380)
The only reason I display a U magnet setup is because it makes it stronger, and makes it last longer. It's my own design to also concentrate the magnetism more into the dielectric instead of scattered around.
I tried with one magnet with a different piece of paper without success.
The new link about your sphere magnet is not working for me.
I will wait to see your sphere magnet, maybe I am doing something wrong, thank you!
I fixed the image now:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Fspheremag.png&hash=eff9bc5e46fab156c1f357e8d4470c925f81a380)
I can do it with almost any magnet.
I think your Volt meter is not working correctly.
I just tried with a sphere neo with washer and toilet paper and still nothing.
My voltmeter is working fine with DC setup, I used it a lot.
I cannot tell why it not working for me, have you try to light up a led with your setup in serie?
Please take a picture of your setup it is completely ridiculous that you can't get it to work, any caveman can do it. Make sure the magnet and the metal are NOT touching or you short out your circuit, and you get nothing for a reading. Also, what scale are you measuring? mV? V? Try testing different pieces of metal, and different dielectrics, I'm sure you will FINALY get one to work.
Really, I can do it with even a tiny cylinder neo magnet and a piece of toilet paper.
mV as well...
I tried 3 different pieces of metal, 3 different pieces of papers, and 2 different magnets (cylinder and sphere)
I will make some photos tomorrow time for me to sleep soon. But right now I am doing the thing fine so far, no success for me. We will see if others from the forum are able to have something.
I am uploading a video to my web page that shows a really small cylinder magnet, on top of a metal washer, with a piece of paper for a dielectric. It gets a very steady 40mV.
I think maybe you need a better Volt meter.
Quote from: TheOne on May 25, 2008, 10:38:34 PM
have you try to light up a led with your setup in serie?
Nope, I don't need to line them up in series if I make one big Magnet Battery with one big soft iron U magnet.
Hey, I have been trying this and was wondering if you have had the same kind of results that I have gotten. Using a neo and a zink nut I found, that my meter will go up to 400mv like it was charging, then spike to 1.108 volts. Then start all over. Something like a compacitor, I guess. Could it be my meter even though I use it often and have no problems with it?
DVDER
No, that is good results you are getting. It works EXACTLY like a capacitor, when the small charge is used, it builds back up.
Magnets have "breath". They get a lot of magnetism from the Earth's magnetic field when they are out of breath. So it really is a type of battery that acts like a capacitor, because it will never really run out if it is in a LOOP like a U magnet.
Are any of you familiar with Ed Leedskalnin?
What is causing this effect? I saw your take on it... or is it some other anomaly?
What are the variables that affect output?
I have tried numerous configurations - combinations of:
1) magnet size
2) paper size
3) paper thickness
4) metal size/thickness
There seems to be no consistency with the readings.
Even using the exact same items - moving them around gives different readings.
Interesting when I put a small button N42 (3/4" x 1/4") on top of a 1"x1" scrap of computer paper on top of a 2 foot by 2 foot piece of 1/8" steel near the corner. I still get a reading from all the way on the other corner of the large piece of steel.
It is difficult to determine what variable is causing what effect as it is so inconsistent.
And the voltage reading starts off higher.... drops for awhile rather quickly... then seems to find its 'steady' point and holds. But still - very inconsistent.....
CH
To make it consistant, you need to make it a CLOSED LOOP. The magnetic strength of the magnet determines a lot of the power as well. Strength as in how many pounds it could lift.
If you want to try to explain it in current physics, I would best describe what is happening by explaining "static electricity". This is basicly what is happening at the dielectric, "static electricity". But it is only staying "static" for a short amount of time, when it builds up it releases. All objects based on their size (mass), atomic structure, and other properties, have their own limit of static they can hold.
When your magnet battery starts to get a steady solid reading, this means your are loosing and gaining magnetic force at a steady pace. When it is jumping all over and not steady, this means its still acting like a capacitor and losing/gaining magnetism at an uneven pace. When the magnet battery finds its comfort resonance, it equaly loses and gains magnets from the Earths magnetic field, and acts like a steady capacitor runing at its optimal power settings.
Who wants to try this for me?
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Fgroundsky.png&hash=221db6f844e8a06b65bdc5bd14a6b6f3feaf1449)
One
I tried it using the magnets from a hard drive and some 1/2 in square neo's
I don't have any U shaped magnets so I came as close to simulating one as I could
I placed 10 neo's on the magnet side of the metal behind a hard drive magnet
5 north up ......other 5 north down .
I used a piece of cardboard for dielectric
It didn't seem to matter if I had the magnet or the Mu metal side of the other half of the disk drive magnet facing the dielectric
The stacks of magnets wanted to stick together so I placed a section of 3/8 in poly tubing in between them
All I got On DC was .002 V by itself and .118 holding it between my thumb and fingers .
The strange thing is on AC I got .009 V by itself and about the same holding it between my thumb nd fingers ...........but .210 when I held it so that my thumb and fingers " shorted " it out between the magnet stacks
gary
What are the variables that affect output?
What are the best ratios/sizes of the components?
I don't have any horseshoe magnets.. but what I have observed with minimal testing:
It seems thin paper works better than thick. And smaller is better over larger
Ceramic magnets suck compared to neos.
Metal size doesn't seem to matter much. (2' x 2' 1/8" steel comparable to 1" washer) (weird)
Readings I've had range from 3mV to 50mV
Have you tried to use the apparent power? Like collecting in an actual capacitor and then measuring what is collected?
I have already answered that.
The bigger/stronger the magnet, the more magnetic force there is to create more electricity. It's that simple.
Also, the dielectric is important. I suggest reading everything about capacitors, from Lyden jars, to current day capacitors.
I can tell you that magnetic force travels faster through dense objects than it does through less dense objects. This is why the magnetic force builds up around the dielectric, because it has trouble passing through. The effect you want, is to slow down as much magnetic force as you can, without stoping it completly. You want your dielectric to be as thin as possible, yet work as effective as possible.
I don't have all the answers you might be looking for regarding certain materials and setups, that is one reason why I posted this on here, so you all can experiment and come up with your own world saving devices. Just remember where you got the main idea.
As for lighting an LED, it's possible. :D
Voltage without amps = no power
I have attempted to measure amps. All readings = 0 (setting at DC microamps)
1V x 0A = 0W
That's why I was wondering about attempts at using the "apparent" power...
Capthook, please read everything about Ed Leedskalnin.
Then read EVERYTHING about "Static Electricity" and why it has low amperage yet high voltage.
Also please note, our electronic devices are designed for "electricity" which doesn't exist, and is just a theory that has been HARDLY working for the past few years. So don't rely 100% on your mutli-meter, I would try getting anolog measuring devices instead, they are a bit more accurate.
try to load your "tested voltage" in an resistor as 1 Meg-ohm , 100 K-ohm , even 10 K-ohms, (test now the voltage over this resistor!)
than you can find out the VALUE of the created POWER !.
(because also an small CURRENT is flowing !)
With an high imoedance DVM, as 10MegOhms/Volt , nearly ZERO
Currents flow.
Pese
Excellent!
It's good to see Archer's new physics in reality!
Heck, i can get several Volts even without magnets and metal and dielectric...! Strange..
Try using like 10 or 20 multimeters (low-cost ones, with as high as possible input resistance), connected in series... Then there would be enough voltage to drive a car, no?
Spinner, this has nothing to do with Archer. Actually most of the things I learned are from Ed Leedskalnin, who has physical proof of his knowledge. Also, I do know everything about YOUR current physics and theorys, so I am working with an advantage. I have YOUR knowledge, AND my knowledge.
When you old dogs finally learn new tricks, you will see the importance of this discovery.
b.t.w. There reason you don't have DETECTABLE "pressure" (amps) is because its a magnet. The reason it is a magnet, and stays a magnet, is because of its atomic alignment and the circulation of electric particles within it. It is a "natural electricity" moving on its own without any "pressure". It's moving under it's own attraction/repulsion, and not from external pressure.
@One
Yes, Leedskalnin's work is legendary, and I see it is also the most suitable to explain your experiments..
But if you have some free time, it may be helpful if you look at the old electro/magnetism knowledge.
There's some stuff like Ohm's law, induction, etc...
Take it as a friendly advice.
Cheers!
Spinner, you are aware that Volts = electrons right?
edit;;
ah crap I just realised I made some serious typos in my last post when I said (pressure)(amps).
I am aware that Volts = Pressure and Amps = Current.
I got my terms mixed.
Listen, the Magnet Battery is to show you a method that you don't yet understand, and which is not easly explained by your current electronic theory. I am going to have a hard time translating from my understanding to your theorys so that you can understand it.
I just want to make it clear that most of your current day knowledge about electricity is useless. I'm sorry but its true.
Can you believe we are actually living in a world where we use power transformers to go from 120 Volts to 12 Volts for a computer??? Do you know how much loss that is????????????
ALL of your electronics "heat up", that is even more wasted electric particles.
When you understand why a U magnet and keeper alone don't give a voltage reading, but a u magnet and keeper with a dielectric WILL give you a voltage reading, then come talk to me..
Spinner, do you understand what is happening in a Voltaic Pile?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaic_pile
A voltaic Pile is basicly an open version of my Magnet Battery.
My Magnet Battery is basicly a shorted out battery (close circuit), and the voltaic pile is not, its a (open circuit).
Hey, if you want some AMP readings... soak your dielectric in water LOL.
Man you guys are slow!
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Famps.png&hash=5b0de0868ec5b511c8719f043fa8370918cd4677)
Actually, after soaking my dielectric in water, I am getting .5+ Volts from the above magnet at .115+ mA
Teh pictures above are out dated i have new ones i will post.
Quote from: 0ne on May 26, 2008, 05:27:18 AM
Hey, if you want some AMP readings... soak your dielectric in water LOL.
Man you guys are slow!
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Famps.png&hash=5b0de0868ec5b511c8719f043fa8370918cd4677)
Actually, after soaking my dielectric in water, I am getting .5+ Volts from the above magnet at .115+ mA
Teh pictures above are out dated i have new ones i will post.
Congrats!
God knows what would happen, if you spill some salt or lemon juice over your magnet... I mean, dielectric... I mean, insulator.. Ah, now i'm totally confused...
You're aware that this second experiment of yours is somehow different than the first one?
Now you're closer to the real battery. The magnet is actually not necessary, you can replace it with some other metal...
Here we go,
.5 Volts at .101 mAmps FROM A MAGNET.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Fvolts1.png&hash=68e44915e88232b756a59205a1fe8803dd76b6c3)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawofmagnetism.com%2Famps1.png&hash=8bbf895830cb5a3e453433406d71a2449ec314e8)
Looking good!
A million of those devices could power a light bulb!
For awhile...
Quote from: spinner on May 26, 2008, 06:06:39 AM
Looking good!
A million of those devices could power a light bulb!
For awhile...
Spinner, I don't think you understand.
My Magnet Battery is not a finished prototype you can instantly put in devices and make work, DUH! It's the concept of motionless electricity that is the entire point of my Magnet Battery. This information is for all of you to learn from, and to make your own devices from. I am simply showing the path.
A very large version of this device could actually do work, maybe even power a house. Especially if you have been smart enough to notice my Earth Battery hints.
One,
fair points. In the future, i'll do my best to understand your views and reasonings!
Good luck with the findings!
So I have been sitting next to a U magnet with a keeper and a paper towel dielectric soaked in drinking water...
It has been giving me a VERY STEADY .360 Volts! It's also giving me 46 to 50 uA.
It has been doing this STEADY for about 30 minutes now... I really don't see it running out any time soon...
Does this mean I win the overunity prize?
Ok, here I am again, 20+ minutes later...
The very same U magnet I have been sitting next to is has GAINED voltage, it is now at .422 Volts and is now very very steady amperage at 46uA...
It seems to slowly be gaining energy... as im typing the uA's are now at a steady 48uA at .450 Volts.. its actually still climbing... im taking video...
Wow my own invention is giving me the creeps!
The amps are steadly rising??
The same U magnet is now at 65.4uA and rising at a rate of .1 uA a second. I have video...
its still going!!!!
Ok the same setup STILL GOING has now reached 95.5uA and is STILL CLIMBING!
Has anyone every herd of this? I am recording video clips...
b.t.w. the inventor of the Magnet Battery is Donald K. Sander remember that.
....at the end of typing this.. the magnet is now at 99uA and climbing...
---edit---
after leaving the U magnet on for a couple hours straight... It has climbed to .400mA at .680Volts
THIS IS TRUE FREE ENERGY!!!!!!
Here is a link to the video showing the AMP's slowly climbing.. The video was taken over a period of 2 hours, and chopped up into smaller sections...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1FQra8gJgk
This magnet is not running out of energy...
@0ne
No offense, 0ne, but it looks to me like you were deeply brainwashed by ?magnetic currents?, ?magnetic batteries?, ?cold electricity? and other esoteric and crappy stuff. Either that or you are just a guy trying to collect donations?
Regardless, you?ve just discovered the regular chemical battery: magnets are not necessary, water in ANY piece of paper (or ?dielectric?, as you call it), no matter how little water it is always there and two metals. Voila.
I?m sad to let you know Volta (1800) was quicker. Apparently the Egyptians knew about it too.
Not farther than current forum the subject was debated several times during last year only. Elsewhere on the net you?ll find it clearly explained as well. So, are you collecting donations or what?!
Cheers,
Tinu
tinu, no I am not collecting donations. Actually the only reason I have a donation spot availible is just incase someone nice comes along.
Also, you are WRONG.
This is NOT a chemical reaction. I get voltage way before I add any water.. Also, I took the magnet away, and I get nearly zero volts. The magnet gives me volts, and the water/dielectric gives me amperage. The amperage was always there, just not enough to be read by a device. Water both jumped the voltage, and the amperage.
It seems the VOLTS are coming from the magnetic force, which is where electricity comes from. Electricity doesn't exist, it is only magnetic force.
This is NOT a chemical battery reaction, I'm sorry to disapoint YOU.
I do not need water to make this work... I only needed water to make you people happy when you were asking for amps.
Read Ed Leedskalnins work. He shows you how he can load energy into a U loop, walk away for serveral months, then come back and take that energy out. No matter how long he waited, the same energy is outputed. The way HE describes getting the magnetism out, is by simply taking the "keeper" off of the U and having a Coil near by to pick up the magnetism as it escaped.
I am showing you the same thing, you can load magnetism into a U loop, AND I AM SHOWING YOU HOW TO GET IT OUT! (well one way, there are multiple ways).
Please answer me, are you familiar with Ed's Perpetual Motion Device?
@One
Where have you been?
Are you leaving the meter probes on the system. You should remove them while you are waiting for the voltage to rise, then only put the probes on to measure the voltage, then remove them again. You can get voltage through the meter at the mV levels you are talking about. Also, is your battery in the meter new. If the battery is getting low in the meter, this could also cause some bad readings.
On your web site, you should change the color of the linked texts. Blue on black is very hard to read. Maybe also increase the font size. Good read. I'll have some questions for you on what you have put forth, with thanks.
Quote from: wattsup on May 26, 2008, 10:34:54 AM
@One
Where have you been?
Hey, I have been busy working on anti-gravity. Nice to be back...
Quote from: wattsup on May 26, 2008, 10:34:54 AM
Are you leaving the meter probes on the system. You should remove them while you are waiting for the voltage to rise, then only put the probes on to measure the voltage, then remove them again. You can get voltage through the meter at the mV levels you are talking about. Also, is your battery in the meter new. If the battery is getting low in the meter, this could also cause some bad readings.
I usualy only tap the probes on the system to check. The last test in the video though was left on over a long period, because I wanted to see the values drop. But the way it was sitting, and setup, it was only gaining over a long period. Which doesn't happen with chemical batterys. Also, I have two meters, both with brand new batterys. I also have a universal ac/dc adapter that I can plug my multi-meter's into so I don't have to worry about bad readings from dead batterys. My meter is solid, it is not giving me funcky readings..
Actually I love this new meter I got, I can directly test LED's on it by sticking the LEDs in tiny bread board like holes on the multi-meter.
Quote from: wattsup on May 26, 2008, 10:34:54 AM
On your web site, you should change the color of the linked texts. Blue on black is very hard to read. Maybe also increase the font size. Good read. I'll have some questions for you on what you have put forth, with thanks.
Thanks for the tips. I will change the font colors of the links, but the size is about right for my screen/resolution so I think it will just leave it. A good tip for you is to hold CTRL and roll your mouse wheel up and down (if you have one), this will resize everything on your internet browser.
Thanks again!
Listen, both magnetism and electricity need to be in "loops" for them to work. It's a fact of life.
Do you know what happens when you short out a 12v battery by connecting a single wire from negetive to positive?
The "electricity" which is really magnetism runs around infinitly in a loop so fast that it starts to heat the wires, and pretty much gets glowing red. This happens quickly because electrical wire is usualy pretty small. What if you replaced that wire with a 1 inch diameter solid iron rod. How long do you think it will take that to heat up and glow red? A long time, if ever...
A U magnet with a "keeper" is a shorted out battery! It doesn't glow red because the metal is thick. Also, because of the permeability of the metal, the magnetic domains are aligned just right for the metal to act like a superconductor. So the "electricity" or magnetism can flow through with very little resistance, meaning no friction to create heat.
b.t.w. I have scientific experiments you can do at home to prove electricity is two different forces... not 1.
For those that think it is only a chemical reaction:
Water has an atomic structure set in such a way that it makes it diamagnetic. This is a fact. When you add a diamagnetic substance between two magnetised objects such as two metal plates, there is not a chemical reaction. You are simply using water as an "insulator" or "dielectric" like a capacitor, and the electromagnetic interactions between the two metal plates have to pass through the water. The water helps slow the electromagnetic interaction and it actually builds up a collection of electromagnetic particles near the two plates. Much like a capacitor, but with "electricity" running both directions in the capacitor.
I think the hardest thing for people to understand is the FACT that every single object on Earth is electromagnetic.
Quote from: wattsup on May 26, 2008, 10:34:54 AM
You can get voltage through the meter at the mV levels you are talking about.
This was my thinking of what was at least partially responsible for the 'anomaly'.
@ One:
The effect you have noticed is an interesting one and one I was unaware of, and as such, I wanted to learn more about it.....
After a quick read about Ed - I see he had a 4th grade education and wrote several "booklets" on several subjects - one being the 'magnetic battery'. This device is shown in several videos of being able to store an
applied charge for a long time without degrading. However, the device is very large and heavy, while being able to store only a very small charge. (a 3', 20 lb. device stored 1 sec. of charge for a small LED - not a very good battery)
Your application as a 'energy production device' rather than just a storage medium would be great - if it was practical.
Your idea of powering an electric car forever with such a device would appear impossible as it would seem to require a device the size of a large skyscraper.
I'm not sure what the addition of water to the mix is doing - others have posted possible scenarios.
I'm interested in further results/explanations of the effect....but at first (and second) examination, it appears impractical..
CH
@0ne,
It?s hard to see the simple real facts, isn?t it?
1. You place instead of the poor piece of paper (which ALWAYS contains moisture, in case I wasn?t clear enough above) a tiny sheet of real dielectric, like the cheapest one taken from a plastic garbage bag or similar. Then you?re welcome to come back and show me the voltage if you?ll ever get any.
2. Forget about magnets for a while; put back the paper you regularly use, place instead of magnet and holder two pieces of dissimilar metals (i.e. cooper and zinc or alluminium) and ADD MECHANICAL PRESSURE (That?s all your magnet does: it attracts the holder and create close contact through pressure). How do you explain the voltage now? It must be a well intricate ?magnetic current? since it manifests without magnets, isn?t it?
3. I?ve read several papers of Edward Leedskalnin. For his time, the man had a few ideas. Rudimentary ideas and concepts, nonetheless but at least he tried. For our time, it?s plain BS. None of his devices work. What?s the point?
Cheers,
Tinu
Quote from: capthook on May 26, 2008, 11:35:02 AM
This was my thinking of what was at least partially responsible for the 'anomaly'.
@ One:
The effect you have noticed is an interesting one and one I was unaware of, and as such, I wanted to learn more about it.....
After a quick read about Ed - I see he had a 4th grade education and wrote several "booklets" on several subjects - one being the 'magnetic battery'. This device is shown in several videos of being able to store an applied charge for a long time without degrading. However, the device is very large and heavy, while being able to store only a very small charge. (a 3', 20 lb. device stored 1 sec. of charge for a small LED - not a very good battery)
Your application as a 'energy production device' rather than just a storage medium would be great - if it was practical.
Your idea of powering an electric car forever with such a device would appear impossible as it would seem to require a device the size of a large skyscraper.
I'm not sure what the addition of water to the mix is doing - others have posted possible scenarios.
I'm interested in further results/explanations of the effect....but at first (and second) examination, it appears impractical..
CH
Thanks for your reply.
I do however want to correct you. Ed never made a "magnetic battery". He only made a "perpetual motion holder". It was his way of proving to the world that magnetic force is circulating perpetualy inside of metal. It was not only a "perpetual motion holder" but it was also a "electromagnet" and a "transformer". Yes the same device transforms "direct current" into "alternating current".
However, it was never ment to be a battery. Nor did Ed ever mention trying to hold as much charge as he could in it. Actually, in ALL of his tests with the device, he only TAPS the contacts of a 12v battery to load magnetism into the U loop. Which was enough to light a light bulb. He clearly says "you don't waste as much magnetism from your batterys when you use this method".
In his books, he clearly shows scientific experiments that you can do to prove that a U magnet looses some of its strength when a coil hooked to a light bulb enters the middle of the U. He then says the U magnet gains its strength back when the coil/light exits the middle of the U magnet. It proves that the magnetism is used to light the light bulb. It also proves magnets recieve extra magnetism from Earth's magnetic field. Ed also talks about how magnetic particles are lost and gained in normal magnets. This is why I talk about magnets having "breath", and "zero point energy", because they can reload energy. I started a funky thread about it, but it was way to foreign I guess.
anyway, you do not need a large size object, you just need more magnetism. so size is not impracticle.
I don't understand why you are talking impractability anyway, I am not marketing a product, nor am I displaying my Magnet Battery design for any type of product use. I am simply showing you a method that you may want to know about.
Quote from: 0ne on May 26, 2008, 12:01:13 PM
anyway, you do not need a large size object, you just need more magnetism. so size is not impracticle.
I don't understand why you are talking impractability anyway, I am not marketing a product, nor am I displaying my Magnet Battery design for any type of product use. I am simply showing you a method that you may want to know about.
Well, more magnetism requires more size.......(where to get an N5,000 magnet? )
And as to practicality - if a device doesn't do anything useful (ie. create useable power at a reasonable size)- what's the point?
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 11:42:22 AM
It?s hard to see the simple real facts, isn?t it?
What, like the fact that everything is electro
magnetic? Actually I think you are the only one that can't see the facts.
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 11:42:22 AM
1. You place instead of the poor piece of paper (which ALWAYS contains moisture, in case I wasn?t clear enough above) a tiny sheet of real dielectric, like the cheapest one taken from a plastic garbage bag or similar. Then you?re welcome to come back and show me the voltage if you?ll ever get any.
I tried two different types of trash bags. One was black in color by some off brand, and another was white in color by "Hefty". I got at least 3mV from Each bag. This is compared to an absolute ZERO reading when no dielectric is used. The conclusion is, even with dielectrics that were designed with high amperage's in mind, it STILL worked. I still think its best to stick with dielectrics that work differently at different amperages, thanks.
I have studied several different types of capacitors, I'm pretty sure I made that clear. I have SEVERAL
new capacitor designes that work with sacred geometry, completely replacing any need for a dielectric. Did I mention I study Alchemy and Chemistry as well? Trust me when I say my knowledge is different than yours.
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 11:42:22 AM
2. Forget about magnets for a while;
Ok, let me just forget about the magnets that are needed at the powerplant to pump the "electricity" I need to run my computer.... Oh and every electric device in the world.
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 11:42:22 AM
put back the paper you regularly use, place instead of magnet and holder two pieces of dissimilar metals (i.e. cooper and zinc or alluminium) and ADD MECHANICAL PRESSURE (That?s all your magnet does: it attracts the holder and create close contact through pressure). How do you explain the voltage now? It must be a well intricate ?magnetic current? since it manifests without magnets, isn?t it?
Dear child, you need to open your eyes. Everything is magnetic. Yes, if you would have come out from under your rock you would know it is a scientific fact the entire universe is made of electromagnetic forces... That means everything is magnetic. That is probably why you can rub every single object in the world with another object, and get "attraction and repulsion". Yes, static electricity does that. Why on Earth would paper scraps fly towards a magic wond that was rubbed with cloth? Why do lightning bolts leave my fingers after rubbing my feet on the carpet? Am I a magnet? Is the carpet a magnet? Yes. Everything is a magnet, that is why everything can make "electricity". Even if it's "static".
Do you understand the TRUE NATURE of MECHANICAL PRESSURE? Where did that pressure come from? Other magnets? Yes. What is it really? Its strong attraction/repulsion from two objects on a sub-atomic level. Do you know much about quantum physics? Maybe I should refer to you the fact that a basketball, when bounced on the ground, NEVER TOUCHES THE GROUND. Read about THAT.
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 11:42:22 AM
3. I?ve read several papers of Edward Leedskalnin. For his time, the man had a few ideas. Rudimentary ideas and concepts, nonetheless but at least he tried. For our time, it?s plain BS. None of his devices work. What?s the point?
You CLEARLY missed ALL of his SCEINTIFIC EXPERIMENTS. His entire "Magnetic Current" book is full of PHYSICAL EXPERIMENTS.
You also missed when he said this:
"The reading is not intended for the general public.
Only those who want to experiment should order the booklet. The other people should save their money."
Also, his "perpetual motion device" worked flawlessly as he claims. It's a perpetual motion device (invisible to the human eye motion), its a power transformer, and it is an electromagnet. 100% worked flawlessly.
Quote from: capthook on May 26, 2008, 12:13:20 PM
Well, more magnetism requires more size.......(where to get an N5,000 magnet? )
And as to practicality - if a device doesn't do anything useful (ie. create useable power at a reasonable size)- what's the point?
capthook, you can make your own magnets with "electricity". Read Ed's book and you will know how.
Also, I assure you, size is not an issue. Please stop looking at my device as a product, look at is as a method. This method CAN be improved. Actually, I'm quite sure that this Magnet Battery method holds the key to collecting energy from Earth, wirelessly. Just like Nikola Teslas black box. You only need to understand the true nature of the universe and the true working method of this Magnet Battery to understand.
Nikola Tesla powered an electric car to 90mph, and said it would never stop running. Do you understand how Earth can allow you to do that? I'm pretty sure I do.
fast test:
best results 25mv with cotton tissue 2 layer better than 1 and stone drill bits on the other
side.
low value with iron plate.
If you put an intermediate aluminium iron or bronze plate and meausure
voltage between this plate and the magnet low value less then 5mv.
This mean that the effect is not capacitive.
The voltage is stable.
@0ne,
Well yes, you are a smart alchemist. I?m just a poor physicist... ;) LOL
Why on Heaven would an alchemist try teaching a physicist quantum physics?! ::)
Or even mention it?! ;D
Quote from: 0ne on May 26, 2008, 12:36:31 PM
I tried two different types of trash bags. One was black in color by some off brand, and another was white in color by "Hefty". I got at least 3mV from Each bag.
This is not holding water. Maybe some will buy it but that?s not me. I suppose you don?t have a movie proving it, do you?
Now that you prove your superiority, can you just take off the donation request on your scientific web page?
Cheers,
Tinu
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 11:42:22 AM
[snip]
3. I?ve read several papers of Edward Leedskalnin. For his time, the man had a few ideas. Rudimentary ideas and concepts, nonetheless but at least he tried. For our time, it?s plain BS. None of his devices work.
I used to be a great admirer of Ed.L.
Not diminishing any of his accomplishments, or his determination, all I can say Ed was a fervent reader of technical/scientific literature. Having said that, all his accomplishments were based on information from text books.
The way he put all this information at work might be [or not] entirely his achievement.
As for "None of his devices work" here I have to strongly disagree.
His PMH is a single example. The principle is from a book of his time (not his invention) and since then, not many dared to build his PMH.
However here it is at work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y31dUcO2z_o
And Tinu, please don't take me offensive, out there is a great deal of examples which prove actually that current science is the brainwasher. Otherwise PMH would be common knowledge nowadays, not fiercely dismissed as BS.
Again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y31dUcO2z_o
or DIY if there are money to spare.
Regards.
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 01:12:01 PM
@0ne,
Well yes, you are a smart alchemist. I?m just a poor physicist... ;) LOL
Why on Heaven would an alchemist try teaching a physicist quantum physics?! ::)
Or even mention it?! ;D
The same reason why Isaac Newton would bother to translate "The Emerald Tablets". You are aware that mostly ALL of physics and chemistry originated from Alchemy right? Do you know where most Alchemy information comes from? Thrice?
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 01:12:01 PM
This is not holding water. Maybe some will buy it but that?s not me. I suppose you don?t have a movie proving it, do you?
I do now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQHLtSDwtyc
Actually I used a different U magnet and metal for this test. It was giving me 170mV.
Quote from: tinu on May 26, 2008, 01:12:01 PM
Now that you prove your superiority, can you just take off the donation request on your scientific web page?
Cheers,
Tinu
When a singer/guitarist goes out in public with their guitar case open, not all of them care about the gratitude in the form of money. Most of them simply care only about pleasing the audience, and playing music from their heart. Seeing the audience dance, laugh, and enjoy the gift of music is priceless and can not be compared to any amount of money. Much like how free music, that makes you dance, and laugh, can be a priceless gift.
There are a select few individuals in this world who feel obligated to return a favor when they receive one. There is also a select few individuals in this world who feel insulted when you refuse a gift from them. So keeping the donation button might benefit both of us. After all, this world does run on money and my website does run on money too. I could litter my website with advertisements like overunity.com does, should I do that instead??
No, its much more polite to acknowledge a way to send gratitude via donation, and leave it at that. After all, I AM NOT A BEGGER, if I was I would be busy trying to pitch my ideas to investors.
I recall seeing this some time ago on youtube the guy used washers instead rather interesting effect...
Who says magnets do not provide power pffft!
This is the basis of how eestor appearntly out of texas is planing to make its batteries as well!
Anyhow there is power in magnets in just has to be harnessed.
-infringer-
Nice work 0ne
Look forward too seeing more.
Cheers
Sean.
Quote from: 0ne on May 25, 2008, 09:14:52 PM
I have decided to release some information to change the world. I am doing this 100% free of charge. If the information I give you is helpfull in any way, which I'm sure it will be, feel free to thank me with a donation on my main web page.
I wanted to add a very important find that you might want to try yourself when testing Magnet Batteries.
I found that by letting the metal be naturally attracted to the magnet, it finds a much better "home", or atomic alignment, and increases your voltage. I don't believe this type of information has ever been mentioned in history till now.
What I do is lay the metal down, then lay the dielectric (paper for ex.) on top of the metal. Then hover the magnet over the paper and let the metal attract to the position it wants on its own.
My theory is that it more accurately/naturally aligns the atomic poles of the metal and the magnet. This allows the magnetic force to circulate around the metal with even greater speed, turning the metal and magnet into a more "fine tuned" superconductor.
I believe I know why it is not working for me, I have like 1lb of silica gel lying around in a desk, enough to dry the air in all my appartment, so all my paper are 100% dry, no humididy at all, its maybe why it is not working.
I have tried to wet the toilet paper and now I am getting a very low voltage around 2 mv with my sphere magnet, so I believe they are no usefull use of this "technologie" at least in my appartment lol.
Quote from: TheOne on May 26, 2008, 09:46:27 PM
I believe I know why it is not working for me, I have like 1lb of silica gel lying around in a desk, enough to dry the air in all my appartment, so all my paper are 100% dry, no humididy at all, its maybe why it is not working.
I have tried to wet the toilet paper and now I am getting a very low voltage around 2 mv with my sphere magnet, so I believe they are no usefull use of this "technologie" at least in my appartment lol.
I am very disapointed at your pathetic attempt at recreating a Magnet Battery. Almost believe you didn't even try. Well, guess you have no reason to post here anymore then.. see ya.
I try and it not worked, stop attacking peoples trying to experiment your thing.
IT IS NOT WORKING FOR ME, its not my multimeter, its not my metal piece, its not my magnet.
You are pathetic by attacking me and I believe everyone from this forum will see that you are pathetic not me.
CHILDREN
Can we stop the name calling ?
There will be no progress made in this thread if it degrades into petty bickering .
@The One .......... are you really using a sphere magnet?
I thought it was clear from the start that to get the best affect a U shaped magnet is best .
I would think that of all the possible shapes a sphere magnet is probably one of the worst for this particular application .
@ One
You have said that you think this can be taken further ...... can you explain more about your ideas on how it can be imporived? Or how to take the next step ?
So far I havn't got any real power ........and only about .023 V
I have been playing with a old 18 V battery for my drill. I found out last week that it no longer holds a charge .
After sitting a month or so it was down to 2.4 V I had hoped that this little battery would be enough to keep the charge up and maybe have a little reconditioning effect ......... it is not quite that strong ......but it does keep the charge from falling as fast .
One thing that I noticed is that once it sits for a while the magnets do seem to charge in some way .
When I dissconnect the 18 V battery the magnets quickly drop to about .5 V then the drop seems to slow way down ...... by the time it reaches .2 volts it is dropping pretty slow .
Just tapping the battery contacts the magnet voltage seems to jump up fast and drop quite a bit slower than it rises .
Maybe this effect can be useful
Oh .............the set up I am using is a set of disk drive magnets on a each side of a spare coil of soft iron wire . .....using canvas as dielectric.
gary
Quote from: resonanceman on May 26, 2008, 11:29:30 PM
@ One
You have said that you think this can be taken further ...... can you explain more about your ideas on how it can be imporived? Or how to take the next step ?
Maybe this effect can be useful
Oh .............the set up I am using is a set of disk drive magnets on a each side of a spare coil of soft iron wire . .....using canvas as dielectric.
gary
Ok im sorry for my attitude, I am a little on edge, and I get frustrated when I see negative results from your Magnet Batteries that aren't designed the way I planned.
Is there ANYONE who has tested a U magnet besides me?
There is a HUGE difference when it is ONE U magnet.
Sphere magnets, cylinder magnets, bar magnets, and square magnets all have their "neutral" spot in the exact center of the metal, and the circulation is from the middle traveling outwards. In a U magnet, there is no "neutral" spot, and the circulation is around in an outer ring. The magnetic force from the U magnet is also trapped inside when enclosed with a "keeper". You can not do that with other magnets.
With experiments, I found that the stronger the magnet, the higher the volts/amps. But, even my strongest magnet didn't compare to the U magnet's strength, and the U magnets are really weak. So this is evidence that the U magnet is the best setup, which was my MAIN DESIGN FEATURE.
I only said you can TEST with other magnets. The U magnet aspect is what you should really test.
About "The Next Step", I'm certain the next step is for people to learn to acknowledge new theories from others. It seems people don't want to discover anymore, they just want to recite books they read and trust with their heart like a Bible.
double post sorry..
Quote from: 0ne on May 27, 2008, 12:31:44 AM
Ok im sorry for my attitude, I am a little on edge, and I get frustrated when I see negative results from your Magnet Batteries that aren't designed the way I planned.
Is there ANYONE who has tested a U magnet besides me?
There is a HUGE difference when it is ONE U magnet.
Sphere magnets, cylinder magnets, bar magnets, and square magnets all have their "neutral" spot in the exact center of the metal, and the circulation is from the middle traveling outwards. In a U magnet, there is no "neutral" spot, and the circulation is around in an outer ring. The magnetic force from the U magnet is also trapped inside when enclosed with a "keeper". You can not do that with other magnets.
With experiments, I found that the stronger the magnet, the higher the volts/amps. But, even my strongest magnet didn't compare to the U magnet's strength, and the U magnets are really weak. So this is evidence that the U magnet is the best setup, which was my MAIN DESIGN FEATURE.
I only said you can TEST with other magnets. The U magnet aspect is what you should really test.
About "The Next Step", I'm certain the next step is for people to learn to acknowledge new theories from others. It seems people don't want to discover anymore, they just want to recite books they read and trust with their heart like a Bible.
I don't have any U shaped magnets at this time ...........and unfortunately magnets are not in the budget any time soon .
You didn't say anything about if you saw my finding the difference is voltage change as important or anything ....... maybe it is not worth the effort to bring it up .
As for your next step ..........it aint going to happen that way .
Everyone here is going to be exactly who they are .......in spite of what you want them to be.
The question is .. ....... can you work with people that are less than perfect in your eyes?
gary
ppl seem to have fallen in love with waterboys theory at oupower.com
the simplest way to ever get a motor running on water would be a modiied sparkplug/injector called an ELECTROSPARY SPARKPLUG
google : electrospray ionization
the sparkplug acts as an injector and sparkplug , the water is held by capilaryty gets reloaded with amazing stability at very high speed ,( this thing will never break unlike a fuel pump.)
http://youtube.com/user/wwwshark
http://youtube.com/user/elysiumcerulean
as per us patent ########### 7198208
who needs gas intake anyways? water holds hydrogen,oxygen and nitrogen, just round-off the air intake camshaft or weld it shut .This setup needs the vacuum created by the motor to facilitate electrolysis, . Timing must be perfect , as the piston goes down , the fuel chamber gets hit with enough voltage to instantly vaporize the gas .When this thing comes out, its ionized and atomized , the molecules or atoms search to distance themselves (this is a good thing).Next phase ,the piston compresses the ion gas , then zap it again with much higher voltage then was used to turn the water into gas-vapor . then BOOM . Thermal ignition shockwave or w/e you wanna call it . The few drops of water get refilled instantly by voltage , very simple .Exhaust that the steam out and start again. Im not sure if the motor would run cool enough that this would work. The ignition timing is the same , the only that changes is that a second voltage pulse is needed before the ignition in order to blast out the water in the expanding vacuum.
Maybe install a laser in it or w/e , might not even be needed. Ppl have got to thik how to apply it to an engine, not just making lots of bubbles
So what is needed basically ? a modified sparkplug , a second pulse .... i think thats pretty much it
Quote from: TheOne on May 26, 2008, 10:57:16 PM
IIT IS NOT WORKING FOR ME
@ TheOne:
Try touching one probe to the magnet, and the other to the metal. It's could be confusing in the picture as it looks like the second probe is on the paper......
Quote from: dankie on May 27, 2008, 01:03:23 AM
ppl seem to have fallen in love with waterboys theory at oupower.com
the simplest way to ever get a motor running on water would be a modiied sparkplug/injector called an ELECTROSPARY SPARKPLUG
google : electrospray ionization
the sparkplug acts as an injector and sparkplug , the water is held by capilaryty gets reloaded with amazing stability at very high speed ,( this thing will never break unlike a fuel pump.)
http://youtube.com/user/wwwshark
http://youtube.com/user/elysiumcerulean
as per us patent ########### 7198208
who needs gas intake anyways? water holds hydrogen,oxygen and nitrogen, just round-off the air intake camshaft or weld it shut .This setup needs the vacuum created by the motor to facilitate electrolysis, . Timing must be perfect , as the piston goes down , the fuel chamber gets hit with enough voltage to instantly vaporize the gas .When this thing comes out, its ionized and atomized , the molecules or atoms search to distance themselves (this is a good thing).Next phase ,the piston compresses the ion gas , then zap it again with much higher voltage then was used to turn the water into gas-vapor . then BOOM . Thermal ignition shockwave or w/e you wanna call it . The few drops of water get refilled instantly by voltage , very simple .Exhaust that the steam out and start again. Im not sure if the motor would run cool enough that this would work. The ignition timing is the same , the only that changes is that a second voltage pulse is needed before the ignition in order to blast out the water in the expanding vacuum.
Maybe install a laser in it or w/e , might not even be needed. Ppl have got to thik how to apply it to an engine, not just making lots of bubbles
So what is needed basically ? a modified sparkplug , a second pulse .... i think thats pretty much it
Dankie
I see that you are saying basically the same thing on different threads here.......... do you have any experience with this technology ? Or are you part of someones advertising department . ?
gary
Quote from: 0ne on May 26, 2008, 08:20:23 AM
Ok the same setup STILL GOING has now reached 95.5uA and is STILL CLIMBING!
Very interesting stuff, One.
What is the resistance in ohms of your circuit?
If you wait for a steady current, note its value, and then place a small known
resistor in series, what is the new current?
Paul.
Well, I spent an hour messing with various small neos, metals and paper, to no avail. I can register some voltage (max 100 mV) but no current at all. In fact, I can get up to 0.6V just by grabbing one of the meter leads, while the other other is touching a metalllic nut & bolt - no magnets involved! No current either...
I wonder if this is not more a "user-specific" phenomena - a type of 'Daniel Pomerleau' thing...
Quote from: Sprocket on May 27, 2008, 02:23:18 PM
Well, I spent an hour messing with various small neos, metals and paper, to no avail. I can register some voltage (max 100 mV) but no current at all. In fact, I can get up to 0.6V just by grabbing one of the meter leads, while the other other is touching a metalllic nut & bolt - no magnets involved! No current either...
I wonder if this is not more a "user-specific" phenomena - a type of 'Daniel Pomerleau' thing...
Sprocket
I am getting results similar to yours ........
I don;t think it is a Daniel Pomereau thing .........I think it is a U shaped magnet thing ,
everyone that I know of that gets magnets to experment with gets rare earth magnets .........I don't remember ever seeing a U shaped rare earth magnet
gary
Quote from: resonanceman on May 27, 2008, 03:10:33 PM
Sprocket
I am getting results similar to yours ........
I don;t think it is a Daniel Pomereau thing .........I think it is a U shaped magnet thing ,
everyone that I know of that gets magnets to experment with gets rare earth magnets .........I don't remember ever seeing a U shaped rare earth magnet
gary
Possibly, though user
One's 'impatience' in one of his earlier posts suggests he finds it trivially easy to reproduce the effect, including with the use of neo magnets - which clearly isn't the case for most of the rest of us...
Quote from: Sprocket on May 27, 2008, 06:48:48 PM
Possibly, though user One's 'impatience' in one of his earlier posts suggests he finds it trivially easy to reproduce the effect, including with the use of neo magnets - which clearly isn't the case for most of the rest of us...
Sprocket
I don't think so ....... he has stressed from the start that U shaped magnets work best .
IN reply 63 he said
Quote
With experiments, I found that the stronger the magnet, the higher the volts/amps. But, even my strongest magnet didn't compare to the U magnet's strength, and the U magnets are really weak. So this is evidence that the U magnet is the best setup, which was my MAIN DESIGN FEATURE.
I only said you can TEST with other magnets. The U magnet aspect is what you should really test.
to me this means that you can get "some" effect from other magnets but the effect he is really talking about is from U shaped magnets .
gary
@One,
Great web page. I think you have done a good job documenting this. But,can you also post a photo of your magnet battery lighting an LED. I think that is the best way to show it really delivers usable power.
@0ne & All
I tried this last night before going to bed using a pair of magnets out of old hard drives I had handy, it was closest thing to a horse shoe magnet I had at hand, and using a PCI slot cover from the back of an old PC for the metal piece. At first I wasn't getting any reading other than a few mV. Then I touched it to try and position it better and it jumped to 0.34 V !!! I figured it was the moisture in my fingers so I got a bit of filtered tap water and moistened the computer paper between the magnets and the metal slot cover and the voltage started going up from 0.01 all the way up to over 0.55 V !!!
At that point I had to go to bed to get up early so I hooked it up to a 470 micro Farad 25 V capacitor, when I got up this morning it was still 0.55 V :)
So it looks as though strong magnets work also :)
The funny thing is that tonight when I got home I tried putting 3 sets of these magnets side by side but it did nothing, no voltage, then I took them off except for the one and moistened the paper and it jumped up to over 0.60 V this time, not sure if it's because the magnet was changed position slightly, residual magnetism or galvanic reaction. Here's the kicker though, I left it as it was and as the paper dried off it dipped down to 0.42 V at it's lowest then started climbing back up, it's been sitting between 0.58 to 0.62 V every time I attach the DVM to check it !!!
There's definitely something going on and the paper is a lot drier now, not counting relative humidity of course which I have no clue what it is in my house right now but the weather web site closest to my area is now saying 45.0 %, it's now sitting at 0.60 V.
Anyways, thought I'd let you know what my results are.
PS: I would really love to show you a picture of it but I can't get it under 65 Kb and I don't have any program other than MS Paint to edit it :(
Regards,
Paul
From House Painter:
UMMMMM, I am not getting the idea of a basic electronics experiments from the 50' is relevant to anything. Of course a CRT emits a static charge, and is easily manipulated by a magnet. As do most display units, but as the relevant question is; are you creating energy or, as you show you are using existing wasteful sources?
To any one:
From House Painter;
There is nothing wrong with"rediscovering" old ideas, just remember , they were already tried.
@One,
I tried this per your web page with non-neo strong u-magnet and keeper with dry paper spacer. There was no voltage across magnet battery. I do get readings on my voltmeter just from voltage being picked up out of the air with the voltmeter open leads acting as antennas. But there is no additional voltage when leads are connected to the magnet battery. Also no current. Meter reads down to 0.01 ma and 0.1 mv. Voltage was measured between keeper and center of u-magnet (paint removed).
Quote from: Goat on May 27, 2008, 09:38:13 PM
@0ne & All
PS: I would really love to show you a picture of it but I can't get it under 65 Kb and I don't have any program other than MS Paint to edit it :(
Regards,
Paul
Try Microsoft PowerToys for Windows XP
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx
Image Resizer
This PowerToy enables you to resize one or many image files with a right-click.
fast easy free and works great :)...if you are useing win xp
Guys n Gals,
I don't mean to but in but I've been reading this and had to leave a comment. Unless you are using distilled water, your experiments may be invalid. Municipal fresh water supplies usually contain at least some dissolved calcium carbonates. Some places, like here on the east coast USA, the water can be as hard as a rock. Aquarium nuts like me know this and account for it as some species love it and others hate it. Point is in this posting, that it is a salt. Also, I'll bet most of you, like me, have neos that are in nickel jackets. I'm not invalidating any of the theories or ideas being presented here, but be carefull of your experimental setups. You can buy magnets that are jacketed in black rubber or you can paint your magnets with something less chemically reactive - like acrylic paint. In my area, you can buy distilled water at the grocery store. Make sure that you aren't misunderstanding what is really happening.
@Goat,
The greatest program for image processing is IrfanView. It is great, and it is free.
http://www.irfanview.com/
Groundloop.
@ Groundloop
Thanks for the info, I love it, you made my day :)
@ Onevoice
I think that as you mentioned the voltage produced is through galvanic reaction but I haven't tried it with distilled water yet. First thing is that this setup is very capricious and the magnets needed to be adjusted just right to get the voltage up to this value, when the paper dried the voltage would go down then back up and when the paper dried out completely it would finally drop down to just a few mV.
With repeated moistening of the paper the voltage values fluctuated and would often be less than the value shown in the picture because I accidentally moved the setup. Another thing is that I never measured the amperage to see if there is any decent amount, if I use it to charge the cap mentioned earlier it seems to hold it's voltage longer but eventually drops as the paper dries and the cap leaks it's voltage.
Regards,
Paul
I checked Ebay for magnets that might be good for testing this .............they didn't have anything even close .
gary
Please do get U magnets. The effect i am describing is based around the closed loop of the U magnet and keeper. You always get more volts. Amps are just the movement, all you have to do to get the circulating magnets out, is give them something to be attracted to, like a coil, then you will have amps.
Listen, the magnetic force contains the electrons. The paper/plastic slows them down and builds them up, dry or wet the magnetic force still goes through no matter what, and builds up no matter what. You can say its a chemical reation all you want, but the truth is magnetism has trouble passing through less dense objects, so they are slowed down, and they build up. You can prove this with a simple magnet and iron fillings.
@All
You all may like to see some old work on the TMB or Thermal Magnetic Battery www.stifflerscientific.com/tmp.asp
Thanks
@ DrStiffler
Thanks for that information, excellent eye opener, didn't realize such a thing was possible or even existed!
@ One
Didn't mean any disrespect by mentioning galvanic reaction, I was just posting my observations on the setup I made and how it acted.
DrStiffler's data on the TMB at http://www.stifflerscientific.com/tmb.asp shows that what you say is true and can be done :)
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: resonanceman on May 28, 2008, 07:54:10 PM
I checked Ebay for magnets that might be good for testing this .............they didn't have anything even close .
gary
How about this:
http://search.ebay.co.uk/neodymium_W0QQcatrefZC3QQfromZR2
(You will need to go to your national Ebay)
Paul.
Quote from: Paul-R on May 29, 2008, 02:34:34 PM
How about this:
http://search.ebay.co.uk/neodymium_W0QQcatrefZC3QQfromZR2
(You will need to go to your national Ebay)
Paul.
398 auctions in that link ........................NO U shaped magnets
gary
Hi, just want to show you my setup.
My highest voltage i get from a simple aluminum foil instead of the "keeper". And i use simple quader magnets. 500 - 600 mV from one magnet. The aluminium foil tripled the voltage instead of the magnetic keeper which gives me ~200mV. Just put the neo-mags on the dielectric (wet kitchen paper).
I put 3 in series and got 1,4 V. The cylindrical magnets on the quader magnets are simple to hold the wires for the series and gives no gain.
@ One & All
Has anyone read the data on the TMB @ http://www.stifflerscientific.com/tmb.asp yet? There's a lot of good information on how to make a magnet setup light an LED! It is very much in line with what One started this thread for as far as magnet potential.
I especially liked the part in the documented data that mentions "We did in fact perform a similar, yet reverse experiment early on, in that we saturated the cardboard with tap water under the assumption that the output would show an increase because of a greater abundance of ions. This experiment was negative, no statistically significant increase in the cells output was found. " keeping in mind the different materials and conditions used by all our different setups compared to their lab experiment.
At any rate thanks to "stifflerscientific's" web page link he posted earlier I now know it's possible to get voltage out of magnets! I didn't think that question had been answered yet on this forum nor thought it was possible, so I guess it answered that question, can a magnet be used as a battery? Yes it can! :o
There's some discrepancy on the information between the LED circuit picture as to the connection setup but that puzzles me but probably could be answered pretty quickly by a lot of knowledgeable EE's here, Ah hum, Groundloop! you up for a small puzzle?
BTW: Groundloop I owe you an apology, back on a thread I mentioned I never seen a spark gap on low voltage well guess what? I've just been proven wrong! In the same documentation there reference to a spark!!! In the summation there is mention of "(3)Cold Blue Arc. When a load is connected or disconnected to a TMB cell an arc can bee seen of approximately 1/16" in length. This arc is light blue in color and not something typically seen in normal electronic circuits. The arc is wide compared to its length and is quite broad in size when initially appearing." Wow...didn't think that was possible at those voltage ratings ???
PS: Dr. Stiffler, If the above quotes or link to your site is inappropriate let me know and I'll delete them, they just seemed relevant to the issue about water in the setup and a possible magnet battery.
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: resonanceman on May 29, 2008, 03:06:27 PM
398 auctions in that link ........................NO U shaped magnets
gary
Use "horseshoe".
Try this soon (it goes on Sunday):
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Super-Neo-Horseshoe-Magnet-for-Hornby-Dublo-Locos_W0QQitemZ130225480764QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item130225480764&_trkparms=72%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C65%3A12&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
Paul.
This reminds me of the Hendershot motor devise.
dvder
Success, my led shines! :D
I changed my setup instead of the aluminium foil with pc slot brackets. I put 4 in series and charged my 4700 uF Cap to 2,1V. Then i put a LED over an 10 Ohm resistor to the cap and the voltage on the cap went down to 1,7 Volt but now the voltage it is nearly constant for half an hour.
In electronics i am not the brightest, an this is the first time i ever used a cap. But i learned a lot from this board. ::)
Will try to put a fifth magnet in series so the led has more voltage to shine.
Hope it's not an galvanic effect because it is only working well when the kitchen paper is soflty moisted. Will try this next with destiled water.
Use Polyethylene, Polypropylene (plastic bags / pop bottles) HDPE (high density polyethylene, milk jugs) Ceramic magnets grade 5 or higher, LDPE (low density polyethylene) Teflon or any other non conductive dielectric or non conductive magnet.
In other words CUT OUT THE GUESSING GAME, and DO SCIENCE! (eliminate variables, cough cough)
Or better yet, figure it out in your head first, and then verify what you KNOW!
Quote from: Paul-R on May 30, 2008, 09:59:19 AM
Use "horseshoe".
Try this soon (it goes on Sunday):
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Super-Neo-Horseshoe-Magnet-for-Hornby-Dublo-Locos_W0QQitemZ130225480764QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item130225480764&_trkparms=72%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C65%3A12&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
Paul.
Already tried horseshoe and U magnet
Nothing found
gary
Listen, the bigger the mass, the more electrons you can draw from it. Once you draw electrons from an object, their protons automaticaly find new electrons that circulate all around us, especialy from EARTH!!!!!! But don't call them those terms! Forget everything you learned! Everything is negitive and positive charges. You can build up 0ne or the 0ther.
Tesla showed ALL, powering his lightbulb to the ground, the EARTH IS 0NE!
ALL IS 0NE
The Egyptian Lightbulb:
http://www.secrets.rodinsquarters.com/egyptiandc.jpg
It's like a Voltaic Pile connected to Earth, with a spark gap!!!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaic_pile
LOOP IT!
damn double post
Using a cone shaped piece of metal or a pyramid piece of metal, you can BUILD CHARGE!!!
It's litterally like forcing this stuff through a small nozzle!!!
repulsion ... small to big = amp
repulsion ... big to small = resistor
attraction ... small to big = resist
attraction ... big to small = amp
Get a square magnet, put it in iron fillings. The fillings will be attracted to the EDGE, because the V type edge. They are all trying to squeeze out a small nozzle.
i like your idea of using a magnet as a battery,but your magnet battery to me is nothing more than the reaction between the steel/metal plate and the nickel coating of the neo magnet and using water as the electrolyte or dielectric. if you replace the magnet with a different metal than nickel you get a much higher voltage...
Yea guys this is just a regular battery. If you piss on the paper it will work even better than water. Now if you want to really prove that the energy is coming from a magnet, dry the paper out, or find a dielectric that doesn't hold water (teflon among a list of other plastics will hold water). Place the entire thing in a vacuum chamber and pump it down to 1e-6 torr. Then leave it at this pressure for a while - it should evacuate any water thats left. Now test for voltage on the batter. If you still see voltage, then you may have something, if you don't then its probably a chemical reaction.
I've seen people misinterpret the chemical reaction all the time. One guy built a small motor that spun and he thought he was tapping into an unknown energy source - it was just a chemical battery happening within his setup.
Hey Folks
I uploaded this tonight, I hope it helps keep this thread going I have enjoyed what I have seen here.
http://www.Youtube.com/watch?v=kWF6UJ77vD0
Next will be the same thing using Diametric rings N42's shaped in a horseshoe like array, it preforms about the same as what you see in this first vid.
Be Well
Tinker
Quote from: Tinker on June 03, 2008, 11:15:27 PM
Hey Folks
I uploaded this tonight, I hope it helps keep this thread going I have enjoyed what I have seen here.
http://www.Youtube.com/watch?v=kWF6UJ77vD0
Next will be the same thing using Diametric rings N42's shaped in a horseshoe like array, it preforms about the same as what you see in this first vid.
Be Well
Tinker
Tinker
Good work
:)
On your video it looked like you only had the aluminum channel on one end of the magnets ....... was there a keeper or some other magnetic material there that I couldn't see?
gary
Gary
Just the AL channel rail, it was tight enough fit with the sticky note to keep it stable. I used a piece of ferrous NUmetal on an earlier build and it was slower than snot up hill in a snow storm and never made it past 150 MV. Then I rememered the OCCPMM and the AL dampers, it does much better.
I also tried some non-organic diametric material plastics including soda bottles an vnyl they were not much help.
I wet the sticky note once on purpose and all it did was short out the diametric material and stop the cycle.
Be Well
TINKER
Quote from: Goat on May 30, 2008, 12:22:32 AM
@ One & All
Has anyone read the data on the TMB @ http://www.stifflerscientific.com/tmb.asp yet? There's a lot of good information on how to make a magnet setup light an LED! It is very much in line with what One started this thread for as far as magnet potential.
I especially liked the part in the documented data that mentions "We did in fact perform a similar, yet reverse experiment early on, in that we saturated the cardboard with tap water under the assumption that the output would show an increase because of a greater abundance of ions. This experiment was negative, no statistically significant increase in the cells output was found. " keeping in mind the different materials and conditions used by all our different setups compared to their lab experiment.
At any rate thanks to "stifflerscientific's" web page link he posted earlier I now know it's possible to get voltage out of magnets! I didn't think that question had been answered yet on this forum nor thought it was possible, so I guess it answered that question, can a magnet be used as a battery? Yes it can! :o
There's some discrepancy on the information between the LED circuit picture as to the connection setup but that puzzles me but probably could be answered pretty quickly by a lot of knowledgeable EE's here, Ah hum, Groundloop! you up for a small puzzle?
BTW: Groundloop I owe you an apology, back on a thread I mentioned I never seen a spark gap on low voltage well guess what? I've just been proven wrong! In the same documentation there reference to a spark!!! In the summation there is mention of "(3)Cold Blue Arc. When a load is connected or disconnected to a TMB cell an arc can bee seen of approximately 1/16" in length. This arc is light blue in color and not something typically seen in normal electronic circuits. The arc is wide compared to its length and is quite broad in size when initially appearing." Wow...didn't think that was possible at those voltage ratings ???
PS: Dr. Stiffler, If the above quotes or link to your site is inappropriate let me know and I'll delete them, they just seemed relevant to the issue about water in the setup and a possible magnet battery.
Regards,
Paul
@Goat,
Can you provide a link to the circuit drawing? I can take a look.
As to sparks, I think it is possible to get sparks at all voltages. But at lower voltages the spark happens so close to the two metals and is so small that one can not normally see it.
Groundloop.
Gary
GEEZ
In the vid I said that the DC Meter went to one AMP, change that to one VOLT then it cycled again.
Be Well
Tinker
Quote from: Tinker on June 04, 2008, 12:26:05 AM
Gary
GEEZ
In the vid I said that the DC Meter went to one AMP, change that to one VOLT then it cycled again.
Be Well
Tinker
Tinker
I tried it with some 1/2 in square neos I couldn't get readings as high as yours .......but I don't have any aluminum handy ......
One other question
how do you have the poles of your magnets set up?
my best readings were with north facing one way on one leg and south facing the other way on the other leg
gary
hey Gary
Stack them in one tall stack N to S then pull two off one end and put them aside find the middle of your stack then break them there evenly with a piece of ''something'' in between so they don't lock up/blow up when you do, and fold them down into 2 parallel stacks maintaining polarity up one side and down the other make sure they are the same way when you insert the bridge magnets on the plus side the AL is the minus.
Then insert the 2 neos you took off the stack and insert them at the plus end between the stacks, this might be an issue depending on how your Neo's are magnetized but I did it on my ring neos with 2 axial cubes and they just sorta adjusted themselves and they worked as well as the rings I put them between. Then find something inert to space at the bottom or in your case you might need to go the full length of the stack to keep them in place.
My rail is from the metal rack at Home Depot less than 10 bucks but that was a couple of years ago, that and it's 12 ft long and kinda hard to fit in a Toyota but you might do better.
I played with AL from Reynolds Wrap to 1/2 in bar AL and found the 1/8 gauge to work the best at this scale, not to say that it can't be done better.
Be Well
Tinker
@ Groundloop
Sorry for the late reply, the circuits are in the http link at http://www.stifflerscientific.com/tmb.asp , the circuit I was referring to is under the heading of "Circuit for a Series TMB Stack". If you look at the picture above the circuit it doesn't exactly match the circuit, can you tell what is being used and how they are connected?
Out of respect to Dr. Stiffler I don't want to copy the circuit's in this thread because of the copyrights. The web page has a clear description of the different circuits and experiments that were carried out, it's well worth the read.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul,
The image is not good so it is almost impossible to see the setup. The image does not cover
the circuit on the experiment board fully so it is hard to tell. I made a little drawing but I think there is
two "battery cells" in series in the middle part between the magnets because I can see more than one wire.
In any case, the circuit drawing under the image is NOT the same as the actual setup because one of
the Sn-plates is attached directly on one of the magnets.
G.
Quote from: Groundloop on June 04, 2008, 01:46:08 PM
Paul,
The image is not good so it is almost impossible to see the setup. The image does not cover
the circuit on the experiment board fully so it is hard to tell. I made a little drawing but I think there is
two "battery cells" in series in the middle part between the magnets because I can see more than one wire.
In any case, the circuit drawing under the image is NOT the same as the actual setup because one of
the Sn-plates is attached directly on one of the magnets.
G.
Groundloop
do you have values for the cap and resistor?
Also .... what does SN stand for referring to the plates
gary
@resonanceman,
I'm not the creator of this cell. I was asked by Paul to try to interpret the image to see if the circuit drawing was the same as the actual circuit. It was not. If you look at the periodic table, Sn is Tin.
Ref: http://www.dayah.com/periodic/Images/periodic%20table.png
[EDIT] The capacitors are 1uF. By using image processing I got the resitor to be red, black, brown = 200 ohm.
(The resistor value is a best guess at best because of the poor image quality.)
Groundloop.
Hi One
What your showing is good, I was doing the same with water, iron and a coiled wire, I wraped the coil around the iron and put it in water leaving one part of the coil in the water the other out and I touched the part of the coil out of the water and the water when my meter to get my reading, I was getting a reading until all the water went but all I had to do is replace the water and off it goes again at the same volts amps, I gave up on it because I didn't feel that it would match batteries we have now for volts.
Take Care One
Graham
PS I have no idea why Archer was even brought into this convo
@ Groundloop
Thanks for your time looking at this circuit, I could see that the picture and the TMB stack schematic didn't agree but was having problems also trying to see how everything was hooked up, you cleared up a lot. I was also having problems with that little black and chrome thing on the inside plate, it does look like a button battery, perhaps it is. Much appreciated, especially taking the time to figure out the values for the cap and resistor, good work :o
It would be nice if Dr. Stiffler could clarify the discrepancies but I'm sure he's much too busy on other projects, it was nice however for him to point this device out though. I would've never thought someone could draw electrical power out of magnets like this, all the other setups usually use coils somewhere, except for the Faraday disk. What's interesting about this one is nothing moves and no outside power being fed into it, according to the experiments throughout the document, very intriguing.
Regards,
Paul
Ok guys, so what's the deal now?
Does it or does it not work with plastic or other isolators that do not absorb moisture?
I ask because One claimed it did but nobody seems to have used anything other
than paper...
And can anyone come up with a better explanation than the Leedskalnin nonsense?
Seems to me that it is indeed "just" a galvanic battery, as was already mentioned a few times...
The use of aluminium instead of iron for the "keeper" seems to confirm that. As does the
need to wet the paper in the cases where that is used as "dielectric" (although wet paper does not
isolate as well and is quite a bit less dielectric) material...
magnet battery, reminds me of the hendershot motor device. any comments?
Quote from: Koen1 on June 05, 2008, 09:11:41 AM
Ok guys, so what's the deal now?
Does it or does it not work with plastic or other isolators that do not absorb moisture?
Dr Stiffer says on his web page they found the right non organic stuff, but wasn't able to share.
I ask because One claimed it did but nobody seems to have used anything other
than paper...
I tried polycarbonate [SODA BOTTLES], vynal and trash and sandwich bags and then went back to post it notes, see my post above.
And can anyone come up with a better explanation than the Leedskalnin nonsense?
Seems to me that it is indeed "just" a galvanic battery, as was already mentioned a few times...
The use of aluminium instead of iron for the "keeper" seems to confirm that. As does the
need to wet the paper in the cases where that is used as "dielectric" (although wet paper does not
isolate as well and is quite a bit less dielectric) material...
My experience has been that adding excess moisture stops the process.
That said not everyone is working on the same approach and reading/not the same information, I don't have a good grasp on it myself I just do videos.
Be well
TINKER
P.S.
For the electronicaly challenged i ran across this on keeley today.
http://www.makershed.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=MKSL1&Show=ExtInfo
First let me preface my exp with the disclaimer that I have no idea what I am doing. :-) I just love the idea of free energy. My expertise is that as an Internet professional. I specialise in online marketing and online video. I have no training in electronics. The closest I came was an audio engineering course 20 years ago. SO i can use a soldering iron, I own a multimeter for the primary purpose of testing batteries and continuity tests if I am testing a cable.
I demonstrated my experiment to one of my employees today who has an electronics technician background and he was pretty amazed. Not that either of us are qualified but we don't think it is a chemical reaction. However I have no idea if this is a battery or something else but I'd love to know from this group of esteemed professionals :-)
My highest voltage achieved until today was .5 volts. About an hour ago I got it to 1.45 volts. I first started with a bunch of small neos that I shaped into U and used a post it note and a piece of gal iron for the keeper. Without water I was getting 0.02 volts with water I got 0.50 volts. Yesterday I bought an alnico horseshoe magnet for $35. I was getting fairly similar voltages. THen I wrapped my makeshift neo horseshoe on top of the alnico and got the voltage up to 0.70 . Then I got an old rusty Square and used the ruler as an extra long keeper. No idea what it's made of but it is rusty. I got my gal keeper and used it to sandwich another piece of paper between it and the ruler on the same side where my horse shoe array is. I attached the neg probe to this it went up to 0.80 volts. Then I stuck a washer on top of the horseshoe array and stuck the positive inside. I moved it inside the washer and it measured different voltages at diferent points on the washer. More than once I measure stable readings of 1.35 volts with the plastic insulator between the probe and the washer - no direct contact. My highest reading of 1.45 was achieved with direct contact.
So have I just got a battery or what? Need pix?
Thanks.
So, what happened here?
Did everyone finally replace the paper with a real dielectric like plastic
and discover there was zero current suddenly?
Or have people finally realised that the Leedskalnin stuff is all nice
for complete laymen but does not really accord with physics entirely,
and that all the experiments he does and the observations he makes
do accord with physics, even though his unfounded deductions lead
to different conclusions? Or actually inductions, since he never once
actually tried to prove his assumptions, he just interprets normal
and understood phenomena incorrectly and ascribes magnetism
a special "magical" set of properties that he nerer once proves or tests.
It may be that on the quantum level current could be reduced to spin coherence
and spin field interactions, a.k.a. magnetism. But if that is so, then Leedskalnin
still does not show or prove it in any way.
I guess I still agree with Tinu that whatever output you're getting is most likely
either a galvanic effect due to the moisture in the air (which seems to be supported
by the observation that it does not work if the air humidity is extremely low),
or a form of "contact potential" which indeed happens to the contact surface
between different metals under sufficient pressure (and the magnets do indeed
apply a pressure to the contact zone). And possibly a combination of the two.
And I also agree with him on the point of Leedskalnin: nice exercise for the ignorant,
but nonsense to those with a little more background knowledge (and experience).
Oh, and that "perpetual motion holder"? WTF? It's a simple iron magnet!
There is nothing "perpetually moving" in there. It's just a homemade, iron,
"permanent magnet". And when the keeper is removed, the magnetic field
change influences the little demo motor which is not surprissing since it
is a wheel with magnets attached to it. Also, it is a known fact that the
change in a magnetic field induces a current in a coil, so it is not at all
surprising that a tiny current can be seen at the coil side when the magnetic
field is changed. And obviously the flux in a closed flux loop does not
degrade by far as much as it does when there is an air gap in the "core",
which is what the U-shaped iron core is. So you've got a 1:1 transformer
with the coils hooked to eachother and an air gap which is closed with
a piece of core segment (the keeper), and when you apply a current pulse
obviously there will be flux, and when you remove the core segment obviously
there will be a resultant current in the coils. That seems elementary...
What's so special about it?
And please don't start repeating "it's all magnetism, there is no current, because Ed said so" again. ;)
Quote from: Jimboot on July 02, 2008, 08:22:29 AM
First let me preface my exp with the disclaimer that I have no idea what I am doing. :-) I just love the idea of free energy.
Ok I am now getting 1.95 volts. I ditched the horseshoe. Whilst I am a complete noob I don't think this is a chemical reaction as there seem to be field related readings. i.e. when using the horseshoe there is a 'dead' spot on the underside of the keeper directly in the middle of the two poles. Also I have used various different types of metal as the keeper. rusty old hacksaw blades, gal plated iron, zinc plated, rusty steel, anyway the readings don't vary as long as the keeper is magnetic. Also I have used filtered (not distilled), tap water and ginger beer as the fluid and there is no change. I also get a reading using plastic instead of paper but it is much lower. A mate said I was picking up ambient AC from different other leads power etc in my shed. However I get the same reading if I move it away from all AC potential influences.
I achieved the 1.95 volts using two 5mm cylinder neos and two washers some paper or cardboard and a few drops of water.
Sooooo how do I get the charge out to power something? Anyone? Anyone at all? I suppose I should put some pix up eh?
Ok I am now getting 3.5 volts. I thought there was something wrong with my meter as it was only showing one volt when I turned it up to 20 voila 3.5. when set to 200V~ I get 6. and 80 microamps
Anyone here?
Hi Jimboot,
maybe you can post a picture of your setup? I can't get any voltage out if i use something else than moistured paper. With plastic between my readings are zero.
But i get allready over 5 Volts with a serial setup like seen in my previous posts. There is no limit.
Exellent - How do I extract the power? Are you running anything with the volts?
Quote from: dolomo on July 05, 2008, 08:38:17 AM
I can't get any voltage out if i use something else than moistured paper. With plastic between my readings are zero.
Which
proves that it is galvanic! You've got a crude galvanic cell that works due to the humidity in the paper, and does not work
anymore when a real dielectric is used instead of a paper 'electrolyte'.
QuoteBut i get allready over 5 Volts with a serial setup like seen in my previous posts. There is no limit.
True. That's a characteristic of galvanic batteries: you can stack em and increase output.
That's how they get those normal 9V "block" batteries to produce 9 volts: they are often just 9 small 1V cells
hooked together.
Nothing surprising.
What you have is
proof that it is
not a "magnetic" battery but that it is in fact really a galvanic battery.
And I take the silence in the thread to be confirmation of the fact that the others already figured this out. ;)
Koen1 stop running your mouth, I already made a video long ago proving its not a galvanic reaction by doing exactly what someone said. I used a trash bag that is made of plastic, with no moisture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQHLtSDwtyc
With low amp's from these magnets, trash bags do not work well. That is why you need a different type of dielectric or insulator, or whatever you want to call it in this case.
All I know is, the laws of physics are flawed. Physics doesn't even know what a magnetic field is made of. Tell me, is a magnetic field a wave or a particle?
I know the answer, do you?
Quote from: Jimboot on July 05, 2008, 10:01:03 AM
Exellent - How do I extract the power? Are you running anything with the volts?
because the amps are to low i can only slightly shine my led. i used an array of 3x6 magnets in series. (3 parallel * 6 in series)
BUT no offence to 0ne as i really like the work of Ed Leedskalnin: It must be a galvanic reaction because if i use a dime instead of my neo.mags i get even higer volts than with my mag because the dime has more surface than the mag. Just like the lemon battery principle. I even tried again with the trashbag and first i got some voltage but than i examined that there a some small holes in the foil. So i searched against a light for a proper foil and tried again. And this time the voltage was zero.
But as these are my first experiments with magnets since my school time, i will buy a real horseshoe magnet and will try again.
so peace alltogether
dolomo
Ok here's why I don't understand the galvanic theory. I can get 0.7 volts with a very old rusty steel gate hinge as the keeper with a dampened post it note between the horseshoe and the hinge. I don't understand where the chemical reaction is.
I can get 0.9 volts with a galvanic reaction using the keeper that came with the mag and a piece of copper pipe in a solution. When I hook this up to my mag battery in series I get 80% voltage drop.
Also can someone explain to me please, why the polarity changes depending on whether the probe is on another piece of paper on the other side of the keeper or simply on the keeper itself?
Thanks!
PS I reached 5 volts tonight :-)
also the amps keep rising. I'll have to take some vid.
Quote from: 0ne on July 05, 2008, 01:18:45 PM
Koen1 stop running your mouth, I already made a video long ago proving its not a galvanic reaction by doing exactly what someone said. I used a trash bag that is made of plastic, with no moisture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQHLtSDwtyc
With low amp's from these magnets, trash bags do not work well. That is why you need a different type of dielectric or insulator, or whatever you want to call it in this case.
...
I think you really need to stop misinforming people because of your ego and/or lack of experience/knowledge. If you are to prove something, at least learn to take your (dirty) hands off the setup and use better quality equipments. I haven?t reply to your movie back then because it was so obvious that you have no idea about what?s going on there that I said why putting you in a bad light. But since you insist, you should know that the insulator of your voltmeter? leads is generating a small voltage when pressure is applied; your hands and body simply close the circuit. So, as you see, the voltage you measured has nothing to do with magnets neither with the plastic dielectric in between. (There are a myriad of other causes too leading to several mV up to hundreds of mV in your crude setup; before claiming a result you simply have to get accustomed to them and to learn how to eliminate/minimize their effects.) Now, if you have to reply to this post, do it carefully; better show a movie as it should have been done from the beginning or just let it go?
In conclusion: think twice before shouting to people and post less if you are not sure. Ideas are welcome. Ignorance and disinformation are not.
Cheers,
Tinu
Quote from: 0ne on July 05, 2008, 01:18:45 PM
Koen1 stop running your mouth, I already made a video long ago proving its not a galvanic reaction by doing exactly what someone said. I used a trash bag that is made of plastic, with no moisture.
Then how come there are so few (if any) people who manage to replicate the effect when they do use a proper dielectric?
And why have you not repeated your fantastic proof with other dielectrics? Do the same test with like 10 different dielectrics,
then see what comes out of your setup?
Have you ever heard of the "Dry pile"? Look it up if you haven't. It's a very old setup of layers of aluminium and copper foil
seperated by pieces of paper, stacked to a height of half a meter or so, and with pressure applied to the top of the stack,
and it generates electrical charge. Electrostatic, but it does "recharge" by itself. No magnet needed.
The explanation? Galvanics plus electrostatics.
And untill you actually
prove that it is not galvanic, which means more than one quick refuge bag test among
the many paper electrolyte "confirmations" of your observation, I am not convinced.
After all, have you checked how porous the plastic is? Why did you not use a dielectric that is commonly used
(instead of a garbage bag which nobody ever uses in a proper setup), a proper layer of plastic?
Do you think all types of plastic are equally good isolators?
And dragging Leedskalnin into the discussion doesn't help, as anyone who has studied electromagnetism
in detail recognises all the effects he observes, but knows more consistent explanations for them.
you can tell me to stop commenting, but you're just preaching your own belief here and untill I really
see a good reason such as real proof that it does work with zero humidity in the setup, your continued
insistence that you are right does not convince me.
QuoteWith low amp's from these magnets, trash bags do not work well. That is why you need a different type of dielectric or insulator, or whatever you want to call it in this case.
Which just goes to show how much you understand of the entire em game, if you don't even see the huge difference between
a true isolator and dielectric and a paper "quasi-dielectric" and semi-electrolyte layer. Have you
ever studied the internals of batteries?
I get the impression you have not. Otherwise you would know that many if not most old batteries commonly used moist paper as an electrolyte carrying medium.
And you would have known never to try that if you wanted to eliminate galvanic reactions.
But instead, you keep going back to the paper...
QuoteAll I know is, the laws of physics are flawed. Physics doesn't even know what a magnetic field is made of. Tell me, is a magnetic field a wave or a particle?
I know the answer, do you?
Yes.
But I assume my answer is not the same as your answer.
The quick answer: neither. A magnetostatic field (a normal "static" magnetic field around a magnet) is neither, according to established physics.
It is a "field" of coherent spin structure in space. If that means anything to you. ;)
In fact, in the context of relativity, magnetostatic fields are a relativistic effect of relative electron motion, as it has been proven
that an observer moving alongside an elecron with matching speed will see zero magnetic field. This implies any magnetic field
is in fact a relativistic effect, in "permanent magnets" also. Is gravity, another relativistic effect, a wave or a particle? Neither,
it is a curvature in the "structure" of space (or space-time if you will). ;)
But I bet you in your Leedskalninesque model will say that magnetism is a flow of magnetic particles. Right?
Which are monopoles but can only exist as oppositely directed flows with the same direction of rotation.
Effectively thus they apparently cannot exist in any other form than that, and effctively the magnetic field
measurable is exactly the same as established electromagnetic theory predicts, and in fact there is zero
basis for Eds conclusion that the common observation must mean that these are such monopole curents.
But I bet you disagree there. After all, Ed managed to produce zero proof and lots of speculation, and that
must be more correct than what established physical science has been doing in the mean time eh? ;)
Quote from: Jimboot on July 05, 2008, 07:31:27 AM
Ok I am now getting 3.5 volts. I thought there was something wrong with my meter as it was only showing one volt when I turned it up to 20 voila 3.5. when set to 200V~ I get 6. and 80 microamps
Anyone here?
Hi,
3.5V is indeed much for a chemical reaction? First question would be if there is a possibility in your setup to have several galvanic elements in series. If you have, it may well be like 0.9V x 4. If not, at this point I?d say that your friend may be perfectly right. That?s because unless you live in a very remote area, it is most probably you have built a RF antenna; what?s not clear to me is which part of your setup act as a diode but that thought is not very critical as there are explanations at hand.
I suggest you try to recreate the 3.5V setup and then to place it inside a very good Faraday cage. As long as your mobile phone indicates no signal, I?d say the cage is good enough. If you still read 3.5V, you have something there.
As alternative to a Faraday cage, if in the previous setup you?ve notice a very high sensitivity of the voltage in respect to the position of wires, your body etc., this is a good sign that 3.5V comes from RF and that by modifying some variables (i.e. capacitances), you somehow are getting close to resonance. Also, you may verify it by changing the voltmeter and nothing else. Usually, it is enough to use a different voltmeter that will require either a ?rearrangement? for indicating maximum voltage (resonance) or if placed instead of the first one will give much lower readings.
Finally, as a third alternative to check for RF noise, replace the whole setup under study with a simple antenna made of one turn of rigid wire connected to the leads of a RF diode. If you don?t have a RF detection diode, a simple 1N4001 will do it, although it will perform very very modestly. Connect your voltmeter to the leads of the diode using coaxial wire or, if not available, twisted wire. In a city where radio, TV and GSM towers are common, by playing with the radius of one-turn antenna and by finding an advantageous position for it, several volts is pretty easy to achieve. I?ve played with such a setup and easily found 2.8-2.9V and 60-70microamps (short circuit current), which is comparable with what you have.
Hope it helps.
Best regards,
Tinu
@ 0ne
You do not need magnet. Metals have differing potentials. Two different metals separated by an ionic solution will produce voltage. This is how batteries are made. Check basic college chemistry books for explanation. Here are some videos showing battery with only non-pure water and two metals - no magnets. Note, will not work with pure water, need to have free ions in the liquid. Salt water will work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-GAvA0YCxE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZfsWwrivec&feature=related
Quote from: tinu on July 06, 2008, 10:48:28 AM
Hi,
3.5V is indeed much for a chemical reaction? First question would be if there is a possibility in your setup to have several galvanic elements in series. If you have, it may well be like 0.9V x 4. If not, at this point I?d say that your friend may be perfectly right. That?s because unless you live in a very remote area, it is most probably you have built a RF antenna; what?s not clear to me is which part of your setup act as a diode but that thought is not very critical as there are explanations at hand.
I suggest you try to recreate the 3.5V setup and then to place it inside a very good Faraday cage. As long as your mobile phone indicates no signal, I?d say the cage is good enough. If you still read 3.5V, you have something there.
As alternative to a Faraday cage, if in the previous setup you?ve notice a very high sensitivity of the voltage in respect to the position of wires, your body etc., this is a good sign that 3.5V comes from RF and that by modifying some variables (i.e. capacitances), you somehow are getting close to resonance. Also, you may verify it by changing the voltmeter and nothing else. Usually, it is enough to use a different voltmeter that will require either a ?rearrangement? for indicating maximum voltage (resonance) or if placed instead of the first one will give much lower readings.
Finally, as a third alternative to check for RF noise, replace the whole setup under study with a simple antenna made of one turn of rigid wire connected to the leads of a RF diode. If you don?t have a RF detection diode, a simple 1N4001 will do it, although it will perform very very modestly. Connect your voltmeter to the leads of the diode using coaxial wire or, if not available, twisted wire. In a city where radio, TV and GSM towers are common, by playing with the radius of one-turn antenna and by finding an advantageous position for it, several volts is pretty easy to achieve. I?ve played with such a setup and easily found 2.8-2.9V and 60-70microamps (short circuit current), which is comparable with what you have.
Hope it helps.
Best regards,
Tinu
Thanks Tinu for your feedback - I'm thinking I've probably discovered something that was already discovered by someone else :-) I'm not convinced re the Galvanic battery but my setup does lend itself to the series of galvanic battery theory. I'll test some more and report back.
Just on the Ed Leedskalnin stuff.... is there a general consensus amongst those who think of him as not worthy of study, how he built coral castle?
Quote from: Jimboot on July 06, 2008, 08:23:41 PM
Just on the Ed Leedskalnin stuff.... is there a general consensus amongst those who think of him as not worthy of study, how he built coral castle?
Not that I know of, but then again there is also zero proper suggested ways in which his proponents show how he somehow used his magic
insights into electromagnetism to do it. It is clear many Leddskalnin fans believe he did it by using his breakthrough ideas and was
able to produce magical OU effects andd levitation etcetera, but nobody seems to have any clear idea of how exactly that is supposed
to have happened, and anyone who has read all of Eds papers knows he doesn't describe anything of the sort. So there is basically
a consensus amongst both believers and non-believers in Eds ideas that nobody knows how he did it exactly.
There's a few odd photos that seem to show rusty parts of mechanical rotor-stator setups, which seem to suggest Ed simply built his
own generator, but nobody seems to know what the design was or how he used it. Since he doesn't show anything out of classical
electromagnetics in his experiments and papers, I would say he simply managed to construct a fairly efficient generator using
some permanent magnets and a lot of wire, and some rotor assembly that is set in motion by wind power which Ed had a lot of
in his corner there, and that he used this power to aid him in lifting and working the rocks in a mostly old school fashion.
But because nobody was around to watch him do it, and people only saw the finished product of moved and worked stones,
plus his apparently to many "groundbreaking" descriptions of his own imaginatory models of electromagnetism, people
seem to have concluded he must have been doing somethign "out of the ordinary", something quasi-magical, so obviously
he must have been a genious who had the true insight into the nature of magnetism and its role in the world. As if good
old Ed was Tesla or something, haha... :)
QuoteOk I am now getting 3.5 volts. I thought there was something wrong with my meter as it was only showing one volt when I turned it up to 20 voila 3.5. when set to 200V~ I get 6. and 80 microamps
I don't follow what you are saying here...
So it was showing 1 Volt at some unknown or unmentioned setting of some mystery kind of meter,
then you "turned it up to 20", 20
what?... Please be more clear... You turned it up to 20 mystery units?
And then it read 3.5V...?
I'm not sure what kind of meter you've got, but my multimeters simply read the voltage there is to be measured,
I do not need to switch it to a certain level, it simply shows me the voltage.
It sounds like you have a really odd multimeter if the voltage it measures changes when you change a setting on your meter!
Then you say you set it to 200V~, which is also weird... Why would you measure things in a settung intended for 200V AC
when you know the voltage doesn't rise above 3,5V? And how can a setting at minimum sensitivity of 200V register a voltage
196,5 Volts lower than its threshold?
Are you sure you know what you're measuring? And are you sure your meter is correct, and that you're using it correctly?
Because it sounds quite strange to get totally different output values by just changing a meter setting...
It is possible that you read different values when switching between DC and AC, but I don't follow the "up to 20" setting,
nor the 200V threshold that measures way too low voltages.
I assume I have misunderstood what you meant to say, so could you please rephrase that?
Re am I sure I know what I am measuring? No :-)
But yeah my previopus post was confusing. My meter was set on 2, which I assume it will only read up to 2 volts. I tested a normal AA battery and it read 1.5 volts. My readings were getting towards the 2 volts range and then it simply read 1 which I assume is the default error reading for voltages above 2 volts. Then switched to 20 where I saw the reading of 3.5 and then also when I switched it up to 200.
An electrician friend asked me to see what the voltage was on the AC setting no idea what meaning it has.
THanks for the info on the Leedaskalnin stuff. Fascinating story anyway.
I have been testing the Gal battery theory this evening and there are a couple of things I don't understand.
1. When I place a neo (nickel plated I think) in water with a brass washer I get a reading of 0.01
2. When I place the brass washer upright on the neo with a wet piece of paper between I get a reading of 0.20
So a reading of 20 times more I find at odds with the chemical battery theory. I realise I must be missing something here.
When I place the brass washer near the edge of the mag with the wet paper between them the readings climb to 0.80. So on the face of it that supports One's explanation of funneling the energy IMHO.
3. I get readings of over 2 volts when the plastic insulation of the probe is between the mag and the probe itself. I don't understand how that is possible with a chem battery setup. Wouldn't we all be getting shocks if the plastic does not insulate at such low voltages?
I really do appreciate everyone's patience here for this noob :-)
Thanks
Quote from: tinu on July 06, 2008, 10:48:28 AM
Hi,
3.5V is indeed much for a chemical reaction? First question would be if there is a possibility in your setup to have several galvanic elements in series. If you have, it may well be like 0.9V x 4. If not, at this point I?d say that your friend may be perfectly right. That?s because unless you live in a very remote area, it is most probably you have built a RF antenna; what?s not clear to me is which part of your setup act as a diode but that thought is not very critical as there are explanations at hand.
Thanks Tinu,
That is tremendous feedback. At this stage I'd say the Galvanic battery in series is the most likely but there are some inconsistencies IMO that don't fit the model. Specifically getting Volts through the probe insulation and the brass washer comparison. I'll test with a faraday cage next. Mobile reception is already dodgy inside my tin shed :-)
Quote from: Jimboot on July 07, 2008, 08:27:54 AM
Thanks Tinu,
That is tremendous feedback. At this stage I'd say the Galvanic battery in series is the most likely but there are some inconsistencies IMO that don't fit the model. Specifically getting Volts through the probe insulation and the brass washer comparison. I'll test with a faraday cage next. Mobile reception is already dodgy inside my tin shed :-)
It?s not big deal, really. And you don?t have to thank; you?ll have plenty of opportunities to help others if you stick around long enough?
Besides, I really like your approach in learning and in conducting experiments. So, welcome to the forum and, most importantly, welcome to the world where theory meets reality and where there are ALWAYS inconsistencies. The only question is if the inconsistencies are of any significance or they are merely a sign of limitation in our equipments and models. In the last case, as you know, the standard language calls it as being ?well fit within the accepted error margins?. First case is more intriguing and large deal of efforts needs to be done by someone before being sure that the ?significant inconsistencies? observed are more than insufficient reading, searching in the literature, education or simply more than self-blindness in the desire of a new and ?great? discovery.
Keep in touch,
Tinu
I bought a new multimeter today and my results were consistent. However when I measured amperage and voltage at the same time, the volts dropped from 3 to 0.5 and the amps rose to 50 micros from 16.
Hmm well that's just plain weird, but let's give it the benefit of the doubt eh ;)
So you do measure a current even when you use a proper isolator material?
Now I assume you're using the horseshoe magnet setup with a soft iron
or steel keeper, and the "dielectric" between the magnet and the keeper?
So you just apply the multimeter probes, one to the magnet and one to the
keeper, and you read this voltage and amperage?
(I'm assuming you used the middle of the magnet and the middle of the keeper?)
Now I'm starting to get the jitters again, even though I have actually performed
this experiment several times in the past (not using horseshoe shaped magnets)
and never got any such results...
But I'm starting to get the feeling I need to try it again, if only for my own piece of mind. ;)
I agree with Tinu that there are some things that suggest there may be something
going on besides just galvanics, such as the proper isolation layer...
And if it were "only" galvanics, then you should indeed be able to get a similar
voltage from any other piece of nickel pressed hard against the iron keeper...
So any difference suggests an additional effect...
I have, by the way, seen the multimeter behaviour you describe often enough.
My primary project is my work on Crystal Energy Cells, which basically and
skipping a lot of complicated talk is research into an alternative form of power
source, much like a normal battery, but without the galvanics. Ehm... Ok,
granted, that sounds weird. Well, it is. ;D
Anyway, I often test my cells for voltage/amperage, and I need to check them
for galvanic reactions too. Won't go into the methods now, but what I'm driving at
is the fact that I very often measure a clearly basically galvanic 1.1 Volts or
something of the sort on the cell electrodes, but as soon as I connect my
double measurement setup to measure amps at the same time, the volts drop
by at least 25% and sometimes a lot more as soon as the amp meter switches on.
Measuring the amperage uses a little of the voltage that was on the electrodes.
Which seems to make some sense, after all, amps is moving electrons, and
volts is static electrons, so when you want to know how many electrons flow
you'll need to get a bunch to flow between the electrodes, which lowers the charge.
:)
I still don't follow what you meant by "switching the meter to 20" but I guess
that'll just have to remain a mystery. ;)
Koen1: Most likely the meter being used is NOT auto-ranging.
I have an old analog meter that required you to know the approximate range BEFORE measuring.
My newer DMM just sets range itself.
One: have you tried BOTH horeshoe magnets thru the dielectric (rather than the one magnet and a keeper)? this should negate the galvanic theory since they are the SAME metal...
As for the NdFeB block etc... magnets. Why not try connecting the washers? one on north one on south, with a thick wire making the "U"?
I MUST go get some magnets and experiment!
Well I have found the washers make a huge difference in output whether it be a galvanic reaction I am measuring or something else. Ihaven't posted photos yet as I need to clean my bench :-)
But I still don't understand how I can measure volts through plastic. Faraday cage next I think to eliminate the aerial theory.
Quote from: Koen1 on July 08, 2008, 12:43:36 PM
So you do measure a current even when you use a proper isolator material?
Yes - I'll have to double check re amps but certainly I have measured over two volts through the plastic of the alligator clip. I'll be testing tonight with another meter and different probes. I'll make a vid or take some pix.
Quote
Now I assume you're using the horseshoe magnet setup with a soft iron
or steel keeper, and the "dielectric" between the magnet and the keeper?
So you just apply the multimeter probes, one to the magnet and one to the
keeper, and you read this voltage and amperage?
(I'm assuming you used the middle of the magnet and the middle of the keeper?)
I have two setups I refer to in previous posts. I'm not using the horseshoe now as I get better readings using a neo with washers. The main setup is attached ina diagram. The blue is the paper between the magnets (yellow) . You will notice the 3rd washer is the only one that has paper either side. I realise this setup will be creating some galvanic effectn(washers are zinc plated). However I believe something else is going on as well. I clip the probe to either end of array (using alligator clips) to get voltage. I can use a mag on the 1st washer and have the alligator clip magnetically attached to it through its insulation and it will register a voltage. I find that ......odd.
Quote
you should indeed be able to get a similar
voltage from any other piece of nickel pressed hard against the iron keeper...
So any difference suggests an additional effect...
My second experiment was to measure the difference between a Galvanic reaction and simply using damp paper as a replacement for the glass of water.
This was done with a single 10mm cylinder neo and a brasswasher. I was trying to minimise the galvanic effect here so I chose a brass washer rather than zinc plated. When using the paper I place the washer upright in the centre of the mag then take measurements closer to the edge which are always higher. Tonight I'll measure both the amps and voltage for the brass washer tests.
I know this is a bold statement from a noob but here is what I think is happening. The washers are having a 'funnelling effect" of some sort. Using washers upright at least doubles the voltage in all tests.I have a few other theories but I need to learn the terminolgy before I confuse the crap out of everyone with my own "newspeak"
Quote
I still don't follow what you meant by "switching the meter to 20" but I guess
that'll just have to remain a mystery. ;)
Not important really. Just didn't know how to read my meter. At setting '2' it would only read up to 2 volts. So I had to switch it to setting 20 for it to read anything over 2 volts and setting 200 to read anything over 20 volts.
The attached pic is what I was talking about with getting a charge through the insulation. I took a bunch of video tonight so I'll get it up tomorrow... so to speak :-)
Thanks for that very lucid reply Jimboot! :)
I'm going to have to try that... Digging around for my magnets now :)
(lol "newspeak" hehe, someone's been reading ;))
Very silly. At first I thought you were making an elaborate joke but it looks like you are taking this seriously. First of all, it looks like you have electric and magnetic fields confused. Magnetic fields form closed loops, always closed loops, the divergence of the magnetic field is 0 because there are no magnetic monopoles though some people seem to think such may be formed at high energy levels.
Ok, if you're measuring a voltage that is not 0 there are two explanations. One, you have formed an actual galvanic cell. It's a battery - when the voltage went up when you gripped it with your bare hands that only proves it more - that's what was originally called 'animal electricity' back in the 1800s. Two, it's the floating voltage of the DMM. Digital multimeters tend to drift and may record a surprisingly large voltage if the two leads are not connected together by any low impedance connection (for instance touching them together). The semiconductors need a solid voltage to get a definite reading, even if that voltage is 0, so if you just have two wires dangling it may drift all over the place. You won't see this with a classic coil-based multimeter. As to why your new DMM measured a higher voltage with lower current, or lower voltage with higher current, I don't remember which, it's just because the device's internal impedance is different. If one of them had huge input resistance and the other had it not so huge, well, the one with the huge resistance would be able to drift more in voltage. If you try your experiment with a non-magnetized piece of iron, you'll be able to prove to yourself that nothing is going on as a result of the magnetic field. A steady magnetic field does not induce any electromotive force.
Quote from: Jimboot on July 09, 2008, 07:43:27 AM
The attached pic is what I was talking about with getting a charge through the insulation. I took a bunch of video tonight so I'll get it up tomorrow... so to speak :-)
That particular insulator (the yellow one) is awful in terms of un-desired effects. It retains a lot of moisture and dirt on its surface. I don?t think it conducts through it but it offers a good electrical path around; anyway, never took the time to see what?s exactly about as I don?t think it?s really worthy.
If you?re a smoker (yeah, I know it?s unhealthy but look as some minor advantages ;D), take off the outer foil on the pack and use it as a real insulator; it still retains a lot of static electricity (some patience and no more mechanical stress pls after placing it) but otherwise it is an excellent insulator at these voltages. It shall quickly solve several main questions. Please post back.
Best regards,
Tinu
Quote from: sandor on July 09, 2008, 09:43:56 AM
Very silly. At first I thought you were making an elaborate joke but it looks like you are taking this seriously. First of all, it looks like you have electric and magnetic fields confused. Magnetic fields form closed loops, always closed loops, the divergence of the magnetic field is 0 because there are no magnetic monopoles though some people seem to think such may be formed at high energy levels.
Ok, if you're measuring a voltage that is not 0 there are two explanations. One, you have formed an actual galvanic cell. It's a battery - when the voltage went up when you gripped it with your bare hands that only proves it more - that's what was originally called 'animal electricity' back in the 1800s. Two, it's the floating voltage of the DMM. Digital multimeters tend to drift and may record a surprisingly large voltage if the two leads are not connected together by any low impedance connection (for instance touching them together). The semiconductors need a solid voltage to get a definite reading, even if that voltage is 0, so if you just have two wires dangling it may drift all over the place. You won't see this with a classic coil-based multimeter. As to why your new DMM measured a higher voltage with lower current, or lower voltage with higher current, I don't remember which, it's just because the device's internal impedance is different. If one of them had huge input resistance and the other had it not so huge, well, the one with the huge resistance would be able to drift more in voltage. If you try your experiment with a non-magnetized piece of iron, you'll be able to prove to yourself that nothing is going on as a result of the magnetic field. A steady magnetic field does not induce any electromotive force.
Hi Sandor - I did explain in an earlier post that I am a noob so keep the insults to yourself thanks.
I'm not claiming anything. I will see where I can pick up an analogue mmeter. Thanks for the feedback.
Here you can see another free energy technique. They guy is getting 3,75 volts from the air
Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y_EotqAn1M
Weeks ago someone here brought up something about magnets and zinc .
It brought up a memory .
I remember reading something about someone using magnets and zinc to create electricity
It had been a while
I looked and didn't find anything
I looked a little more each of the next few days
Finally I stumbled across it again
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyers/meyers.htm
http://rimstar.org/sdenergy/rmeyers/
I am attaching 2 PDFs
One is pretty much the same information as on the URLs above
The other PDF I am adding to make it a little easier to compare with figure 4 in the drawings .
The last PDF is about the Grey tube .
The Grey tube was said to power an 80 HP motor
If you study the Grey tube and Figure 4 I think you will see they are VERY similar
The Miller version uses tubes about half filled with mercury ...... as electricity passed though these tubes some murcury would be ionised making the tube lower resistance
This tube is also a rectifier ......one of the requirements of the Grey tube .........it has to be fed pulsating DC ........NO AC
The construction of the collection grids is very different in the 2 designs .........but I think their function would be similar .
In my opinion the biggest difference is the mercury vapor .......it would allow the Miller version to run on lower voltage .
gary
Quote from: sandor on July 09, 2008, 09:43:56 AM
Ok, if you're measuring a voltage that is not 0 there are two explanations. One, you have formed an actual galvanic cell. It's a battery - when the voltage went up when you gripped it with your bare hands that only proves it more - that's what was originally called 'animal electricity' back in the 1800s. Two, it's the floating voltage of the DMM. Digital multimeters tend to drift and may record a surprisingly large voltage if the two leads are not connected together by any low impedance connection (for instance touching them together). The semiconductors need a solid voltage to get a definite reading, even if that voltage is 0, so if you just have two wires dangling it may drift all over the place. You won't see this with a classic coil-based multimeter. As to why your new DMM measured a higher voltage with lower current, or lower voltage with higher current, I don't remember which, it's just because the device's internal impedance is different. If one of them had huge input resistance and the other had it not so huge, well, the one with the huge resistance would be able to drift more in voltage. If you try your experiment with a non-magnetized piece of iron, you'll be able to prove to yourself that nothing is going on as a result of the magnetic field. A steady magnetic field does not induce any electromotive force.
Btw I don't have two wire just dangling in space! I have one clipped on and another magnetised to the end. When the one in the pic is removed it measures 0 volts. When it is attached the way it is it has measured over 2 volts. I don't "grip' the magnet when measuring. Sheesh I maybe a noob but that doesn't mean I'm a dickhead.
btw your explanation also does not account for a washer, some water, a piece of paper and a mag getting much higher readings than a simple Gal cell made from the same materials (minus the paper) .
I'm just following up on Ones design. Don't shoot the messenger.
@ Jimboot
Thanks for posting your results. Most experienced researchers would say what you claim is impossible and you must be making a mistake. Maybe you are, but I think you seem to be doing the right things and asking the right questions. I have over 30 years doing electronic research and development and it is from the unexplainable things that you learn the most. I am looking forward to your videos. Maybe with more information the explanation will be more obvious.
Quote from: xee on July 10, 2008, 04:37:04 AM
@ Jimboot
Thanks for posting your results. Most experienced researchers would say what you claim is impossible and you must be making a mistake. Maybe you are, but I think you seem to be doing the right things and asking the right questions. I have over 30 years doing electronic research and development and it is from the unexplainable things that you learn the most. I am looking forward to your videos. Maybe with more information the explanation will be more obvious.
Hey Xee,
The experienenced researchers are probably still right! I guess I am being a little selfish here and learning as I plunder along. Looks like I have to find a meter with a coil now. I just through an old one away two weeks ago! DOH! Had no idea the digital ones could be subject to gazing at their own navels.:-) So it's good to find out about this stuff.
Quote from: Magnethos on July 09, 2008, 07:44:13 PM
Here you can see another free energy technique. They guy is getting 3,75 volts from the air
Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y_EotqAn1M
First of all I thought you were 'takin the piss' as we say down here but I have to build one of those now! That looks fascinating. I guess I had a follow up question for the post earlier that thought I was only measuring radio waves... my question is if it meters isn't that usable energy? Reminds me of the minor shocks when you install the TV aerial. Do they get more volts just before a thunderstorm I wonder.
Quote from: tinu on July 09, 2008, 09:48:36 AM
That particular insulator (the yellow one) is awful in terms of un-desired effects. It retains a lot of moisture and dirt on its surface. I don?t think it conducts through it but it offers a good electrical path around; anyway, never took the time to see what?s exactly about as I don?t think it?s really worthy.
If you?re a smoker (yeah, I know it?s unhealthy but look as some minor advantages ;D), take off the outer foil on the pack and use it as a real insulator; it still retains a lot of static electricity (some patience and no more mechanical stress pls after placing it) but otherwise it is an excellent insulator at these voltages. It shall quickly solve several main questions. Please post back.
Best regards,
Tinu
Hey Tinu - do you actually mean foil on the inside of the pack? I'm in AU just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing here.
One wrote:
QuoteFor those that think it is only a chemical reaction:
Water has an atomic structure set in such a way that it makes it diamagnetic. This is a fact. When you add a diamagnetic substance between two magnetised objects such as two metal plates, there is not a chemical reaction. You are simply using water as an "insulator" or "dielectric" like a capacitor, and the electromagnetic interactions between the two metal plates have to pass through the water. The water helps slow the electromagnetic interaction and it actually builds up a collection of electromagnetic particles near the two plates. Much like a capacitor, but with "electricity" running both directions in the capacitor.
I think the hardest thing for people to understand is the FACT that every single object on Earth is electromagnetic.
Ok so you obtain a reading with dry paper and plastic as a dielectric, then you obtain a larger reading with paper soaked in water as a dielectric. From what I deduce from this so far is that you need a magnet and a metal plate in close proximity with each other held apart by a dielectric of sorts in an arrangement as depicted above. As far as I'm concerned I personally would be prepared to look further into this concept and it's plausability if this system would work with an airgap as a dielectric, according to your claims so far there is no reason why this shouldn't work. A water dielectric will result in some sort of chemical reaction between 2 different metals and a resulting EMF, so in that system your newly discovered phenomenon has been contaminated with a well known phenomenon. You should also try eliminate out thermoelectric effects (Seebeck and so on) by comparing readings at different temperatures. At this stage it seems as though the system's ability to deliver power is limited by the dielectric itself (nothing capacitive about it, ok mybe a pF or 2). You need to further your experimenting under varied conditions targeting the concept you are claiming, at this stage there is far too much ambiguity for a thumbs up.
I really do appreciate people who come forward with observations they have made, let's be honest it is progressive and goal orientated. There will be cases where these observations will turn out to be nothing new but then again maybe something big may crop up. The problem is - some readers have no sense of tact when it comes to commenting on people's observations while people that present their observations claiming this and that do not take criticism very kindly and the whole topic becomes a waste of precious reading time, which I've seen here time and again. Moderation on this forum is non-existant. Lets keep the observations coming, the crit posative and the acceptance of success/failure honerable.
Quote from: Magnethos on July 09, 2008, 07:44:13 PM
Here you can see another free energy technique. They guy is getting 3,75 volts from the air
Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y_EotqAn1M
I dont see the 3,75 volts, I see him just barely reaching 300 milliVolts...
And I see him using a fairly long antenna wire...
Surely everybody knows we can use a long wire antenna or metal plate
antennas to "collect" charge? The higher you hang them, the better...
But I never see the guy mention amperage even once, so for all his talk
about collecting free volts, it could be he gets a voltage on his capacitor
but that he's still getting near zero actual power...
Not very impressive at all, imho.
oh and @Magnethos, I happened to come across you peltier element idea
on youtube as well, and I just have to ask: You do understand why that won't work,
don't you? If not I will explain, but I can't imagine you haven't realised it yet...
Quote from: JimbootHey Tinu - do you actually mean foil on the inside of the pack? I'm in AU just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing here.
I don't think he's talking about the silver paper inside the pack, I think he means the transparent plastic wrapper the packs come in (in most countries).
I'm not sure but I think it's cellophane or something very close to it. It has the typical 'static' cling of cellophane... In general most things that tend to
build up static are bad conductors and many of them are good isolators. Except cats. ;)
@Koen1
Thanks for the info, I think that the energy is 3.75 Volts because the guy wrote that in the comments of the video. I can?t see clearly the multimeter in the video.
About the idea of the peltier module, I think that is a waste of time. I made that video because I thought that it would be usefull for somebody with a better electronics knowledge. But I have seen that my invention is a waste of time... This is cience... some ideas will be awesome, and other will be a waste of time. The key is try and test and see what happens.
Thanks Froot,
I guess that is my approach as well.
Some of the greatest discoveries have come from the most unlikely of places. I/m prepared to accept any other theory that makes sense which is why I have been testing the Gal bat levels as well as try various bits of plastic to make sure the effect of getting voltage through insulation material is not isolated to a single item.
I have used brand new clean clips as well as thin pieces of plastic wrapper. I'd love to see if anyone can replicate the effect, I am now thinking of simplifying the array and measuring again.
I think my fields need 'tuning'. If a magnetic field is somehow causing a voltage and not the chemical reaction, I'd think it would work best with the fields aligned in some sort of optimal pattern. With so many washers and bits of paper (which seem to effect overall polarity depending on where they are connected) involved it is difficult to visualize what is going on.
Which brings me to my next question. Is there any PC/Mac peripheral which will act as a multimeter and record readings etc? Or PC Oscilloscope or something?
THanks
Quote from: Jimboot on July 10, 2008, 06:56:08 AM
Hey Tinu - do you actually mean foil on the inside of the pack? I'm in AU just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing here.
No, not the inside one (which is Al on paper) but the outside one.
Quote from: Magnethos@Koen1
Thanks for the info, I think that the energy is 3.75 Volts because the guy wrote that in the comments of the video. I can?t see clearly the multimeter in the video.
About the idea of the peltier module, I think that is a waste of time. I made that video because I thought that it would be usefull for somebody with a better electronics knowledge. But I have seen that my invention is a waste of time... This is cience... some ideas will be awesome, and other will be a waste of time. The key is try and test and see what happens.
That's right. And it is not a bad thing to come up with different ideas for
OU devices and think about them, not at all.
I think everyone who's into alternative energy solutions has thought about
using a setup that uses and recycles thermal differences. And everyone
comes to the same conclusion: energy is lost in the process.
I hadn't realised you had already come to the same conclusion.
BOT; it should be easy to determine if the dielectric you're planning to
use is a good isolator, one should merely need to put it between two of those
washers and connect a simple 9V battery (or another type) to the washers
and to your multimeter. If it is a proper isolator your meter should read zero millivolts
give or take ten from ambient charges. If it is not a true isolator but rather just
a bad conductor, you should be able to read some higher value.
If you still don't believe wet paper can act as a weak electrolyte then you might want
to try that too to see the difference. But I would advise to read up on the history of
galvanic cells (as you'd see that wet paper has been used ever since galvanic batteries
were invented).
In any case, the voltages you're getting do sound a bit high for a mere galvanic process
so that does suggest tere is something else going on...
But it could of course be something along the lines of the carbon rod "Protelf" generator
thread, which in turn also seems to be related to Luc's thread on the weird effect of
sparks being able to jump a much larger air gap than they should be able to given their
voltage, as long as the feed pulse is fed through the right pole of a conductive magnet (a neo).
All these things appear to be related somehow, as they all use a strong conductive neo
magnet, and the energy pulse is in alignment with the magnetic field orientation.
In this battery there is zero pulsing going on, yet it seems somehow a slight charge flow is
induced purely by the difference in magnetic permeability inside a strong B-field.
In the carbon rod setup a pulse of DC is fed through a carbon rod inside and parallel to a
magnetic field, and in certain setups this appears to produce a stronger pulse on the output
side than was fed to the input side, which was claimed to be able to produce 5 times the input...
And in the spark gap thing a DC pulse is produced by momentarily connecting the DC feed wire
(cathode) to the anode wire which has a neodymium magnet attached in such a way that the DC
flows into the south pole of the magnet, and that wire leads to a car spark plug which now
all of a sudden produces sparks that are like twice the size of the original ones.
In every setup we have alignment of DC with the magnetic field lines.
Now I'm not opposed to serious discussion of this apparent effect as long as we can keep Leedskalnin
out of it please. ;)
Quote from: Jimboot on July 10, 2008, 09:34:59 AM
Which brings me to my next question. Is there any PC/Mac peripheral which will act as a multimeter and record readings etc? Or PC Oscilloscope or something?
Sounds like you're looking for a
Datalogger aka
Datarecorder.
I have a nice one, not expensive either, hooks up to your usb port, comes with software such as
digital oscilloscope etc, and has 4 channels to record. It can only record voltages though,
but with the voltage over time reading you can still get quite good info.
There are better ones around that are a bit more expensive but can give more detailed readings.
The one I have is made by Velleman instruments and it called the PCS10 4-channel datalogger.
Cost me something like 50 Euros or less.
Quote from: Koen1 on July 10, 2008, 08:59:38 AM
I dont see the 3,75 volts, I see him just barely reaching 300 milliVolts...
And I see him using a fairly long antenna wire...
Surely everybody knows we can use a long wire antenna or metal plate
antennas to "collect" charge? The higher you hang them, the better...
But I never see the guy mention amperage even once, so for all his talk
about collecting free volts, it could be he gets a voltage on his capacitor
but that he's still getting near zero actual power...
Not very impressive at all, imho.
This guy reckons he charges a mobile phone with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRPE6OG7Mp0
1st vid showing volts vs amps
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x63ay9
BTW I tried the suggestion of using an air gap and got up 0.5 volts. I'm wondering whether that could simply be an antenna effect close to the array. I have to be no more that 10mm away from the top mag to get a reading. MY highest reading was achieved with about 3mm clearance and I got higher readings if the metal of the clip was wet.
Jimboot
I was disappointed with your video. Can you show more of how your battery is constructed? To measure volts just put one lead on the positive terminal and the other on the negative terminal, To measure amps, just change the meter to amps (leads in same place). That will give you open circuit voltage and short circuit current which is the maximum voltage and maximum current. With a load resistance, each will be less by an amount depending on the load. Note, some meters require moving the leads to different plugs for amps and volts, so you may need to do that. By terminal, I mean where your meter leads connect to thee battery (which in one case is through the plastic on the lead probe).
Sorry Xee!
I've recorded about 30mins worth so far. One of my cams was on the fritz so I have been delayed in getting the other vids up.
THere is not much to see with the setup really Just the diagram that I posted earlier, but I will get the rest up. Also I got 0.8volt with an air gap today with an electrician watching what I was doing and he thought it was "very weird" and "did not make sense" He had a go at measuring himself and got similar results.
@ Jimboot
There is no hurry. Either you are making a mistake in your measurements or you have made a new scientific discovery. Without more information I do not know which. When I tried this per original instructions I did not get any current flow with dry paper and the only voltage was from the leads picking up stray electric fields. But I was using a horseshoe magnet not a neo magnet. I will try it again with a neo magnet, wet paper, and plastic spacer. But I suspect it is something you are doing that hopefully will show up in the video.
@ Jimboot
I tried a chrome plated neo magnet, piece of wet paper towel, and a plastic bag spacer. My meter leads are nonmagnetic so they are not steel. Not sure what they are. I got about 0.3 volts with wet parper and magnet. No voltage when plastic bag spacer was inserted between wet paper and meter lead. No measureable current either way.
Quote from: sandor on July 09, 2008, 09:43:56 AM
Two, it's the floating voltage of the DMM. Digital multimeters tend to drift and may record a surprisingly large voltage if the two leads are not connected together by any low impedance connection (for instance touching them together). The semiconductors need a solid voltage to get a definite reading, even if that voltage is 0, so if you just have two wires dangling it may drift all over the place. You won't see this with a classic coil-based multimeter.
OK picked up an analogue meter today. Will let you know how I go. I am uploading a vid today with the digital meters measuring volts through plastic.
video showing charge thru insulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygWAi0r4wOQ
@ Jimboot
Two things to consider:
1. Meters drift on low scales, so a change in reading may be due to drifting. You need to re-zero meters often when using lowest scales.
2. Digital meters have small integration capacitor across input when measuring voltage to help eliminate noise. This capacitor can remain charged for a while after voltage is removed from leads when using low scales. You may be creating a voltage by moving leads past magnets which then remains as a charge on this capacitor for a short time. Try moving steel lead probe back and forth near magnet and see if it produces a voltage on meter when using lowest scale.
Good video. What happens if you use one of your new probes instead of your old dirty one?
@ Jimboot
The time constant on the integration capacitor is too short to effect the reading you see on meter so my comment 2 in previous post is incorrect, please disregard. I'm just trying to think of any wild idea that may explain your results. That one was too wild. Moving wires near magnet can cause voltage, but you probably already knew that.
My best guess is the test lead you are using has a poor insulator on it. Trying a different lead may confirm this.
I needed 2 NdFeB magnets for a different experiment so I ordered an extra one to try this with.
1"x1"x1/2" N50
Quote from: xee on July 13, 2008, 11:24:12 AM
@ Jimboot
The time constant on the integration capacitor is too short to effect the reading you see on meter so my comment 2 in previous post is incorrect, please disregard. I'm just trying to think of any wild idea that may explain your results. That one was too wild. Moving wires near magnet can cause voltage, but you probably already knew that.
My best guess is the test lead you are using has a poor insulator on it. Trying a different lead may confirm this.
Ok I'll try with new leads tonight.
Jimboot, excelent work. I am glad people like you are willing to do experiments, instead of let theory stop them.
Just to clarify my ways of thinking:
I know a lot about current day theory about electrons, and electricity. Ive taken electronics's classes, and studied a lot of different technologies. I myself am a computer guru. From the electronics and hardware all the way to software programing. I also know a lot about mechanics, from mechanical engineering to machine shop procedures with exotic metals like titanium. What interested me the most was that titanium shavings do not give you "splinters" in your fingers when you handle it. Yet other magnetic metals WILL give you "splinters" in your fingers, and they HURT! What I was told was that because titanium is non-magnetic, you wont get splinters in your skin! I thought it was very odd that being non-magnetic would have any effect on my skin, but it does. This fact alone made me really wonder about magnetism, and the human body.
So I started reading about quantum physics, and all of physics in general. From Newton, to Maxwell, to Alessandro Volta, to Einstein, to Nikola Tesla... I read it all.
Someone earlier was saying there is no monopole magnets. Well current theories are suggesting there is, but we supposedly haven't found them. Until I started reading the theories from Ed Leedskalnin. Most people don't know, or ignore Ed Leedkskalnin, even though he built a huge castle called "Coral Castle" all by himself, and people are wondering how he did it. But I gave HIM the benefit of the doubt and I started to use his theories to understand things..
When I talk on overunity.com I have, in a figure of speech, "multiple personalities" or "multiple mindsets". I have the ability to switch from 0ne mindset to the other, or 0ne set of theories to another set.
I could be a "normal" electrical engineer, and tell you all the theories that you would hear from any "normal" electrical engineer. Or I could switch my mindset over and start thinking in other theories that an electrical engineer would never even consider simply because it goes against what they learned. This magnet battery that I have shown you, I like to think about it in "other" theories, specifically the theories of Ed Leedskalnin. Actually, ever since I switched over to theories that I have obtained and or created by switching my mindset, I have made some very shocking discoveries about Ancient Egypt, and the human body, and it is carrying over to electronics.
I know most of you are stuck in 0ne theory, and all I have to say is that if you want "alternate energy sources" then you need to start thinking about, or trying to find, "alternate theories".
For instance, someone earlier on this thread, I think that user name is "sandor", claimed that there is no such thing as a "monopole magnet". Well, in theory, I have found "monopole magnets". The only way I could describe them is STATIC ELECTRICITY.
It is 100% possible to make objects contain either a positive charge or a negative charge. In MY "alternate theory" you can think of it as "monopole magnetic". An entire object that has a "negative charge" will be attracted to another object that is entirely "positively charged". Likes repel, opposite attract, just like magnetism. So in an odd way of thinking, ALL OBJECTS ARE MONOPOLE MAGNETIC BECAUSE ALL OBJECTS ARE SUBJECT TO STATIC ELECTRIC CHARGES, AND ACT ACCORDING TO NORMAL LAWS OF MAGNETISM.
Another user asked about "dry cells". Dry cells I believe are not galvanic, even though current day "THEORY" thinks it is. And current day experiments make the appearance of it being that way. But there are other theories that can explain what is happening, and even explain the experiments. What I believe is happening, is "electrostatics" with a twist. When you have two dissimilar metals, 0ne with more electrons, and the other with less electrons, that means you have 0ne negative charged metal, and 0ne positive charged metal. These two different statically charged metals are attracted to each other. But because of the very small amount of electron difference, the pull or attraction between them will not be very great. But the point to remember is that when 0ne metal is lacking electrons, and the other is over flowing with extra electrons, the electrons will want to pass from 0ne metal to the other. And when you put a piece of paper between the metals, or any "dielectric", then the electrons will have trouble traveling through the paper, and the electrons will build up before they jump across the paper to the other metal.
This same thing happens in today's capacitors in electric circuits. With a normal capacitor, the negative wire (hot) is connected to 0ne plate, and the positive wire (ground) is connect to the other plate inside of the capacitor. In the middle of the plates is the "dielectric". What happens is that a negative charged plate is trying to pass electrons to a positively charged plate, and the dielectric is slowing the process down which actually builds up and accumulates electrons (a charge), and then slowly released the electrons.
Anyway, I know it is very frustrating for you people who are stuck on 0ne theory to EVER accept an alternate theory, but sometimes you have to do it when ever you want to discover something new.
I hope this information helps.
Thanks 0ne. I don't pretend to understand but I do know there are still quite a few things science can't explain so I do enjoy exploring and reporting with complete naiive candor :-)
Also I am a big Tesla fan and enough of his work was surpressed to make me suspicious when anyone says "it's impossible" or "stick to your knitting". I have a very humble attitude towards the universe. I guess I like Boyd Bushman's attitude when he was bending a couple of Newtonian theories "mother nature doesn't speak English but she is telling us things all the time. We just need to be listening" .
I have posted another vid that I made a couple of nights ago with a closer view of the setup for Xee et al.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3mX8S767zT4
OK I'm starting to be convinced of the Galvanic effect only unless 0ne can point out something.
I bought new leads and I can get charge slightly through some bits of light plastic wrapper but it is inconsistent so I'm thinking minute perforations in the plastic or surface moisture.
It seems the voltages I was getting via the air gap (and I don't understand this) were visible when I was holding the positive lead (new) in one hand and I was touching the plastic platform (that the set up is sitting on) with the other hand. This occurred in both the digital and analogue meter. At no time though was I touching the probe itself. That one does my head in .
There is definitely a galvanic effect happening as there is discolouration of the washers, dark stains on the paper contact points and cracked, peeling neo coating (nickel or chrome) at the contact points.
The paper placement however does change the polarity of readings depending on where it is placed.
There is one last experiment I would like to try. Distilled water with non plated steel washers. Or is there a better material that is magnetic but unlikely to contribute to a galvanic reaction?
Just a question. Would a rusty old steel gate hinge and an alnico horseshoe cause a galvanic effect? I get voltage from that as well.
Quote from: Jimboot on July 14, 2008, 06:37:53 AM
I bought new leads and I can get charge slightly through some bits of light plastic wrapper but it is inconsistent so I'm thinking minute perforations in the plastic or surface moisture.
Listen closely.
The reason plastics suck for magnet batteries, is because PLASTIC ABSORBS STATIC CHARGES. It all about static electricity. When you have metal/plastic/metal the electrons from both metal pieces are being absorbed into the plastic, then the plastic actually starts to repel the metals. This is killing the total effect, but not 100% depending on the exact properties of the plastic, and how well they react to static electricity. Just read about how plastic reacts to static electricity.
You want a substance that will still allow the electrons to pass from metal to metal. You don't want a substance that takes electrons from both metals and holds them.
Look at this thread I created at abovetopsecret.com
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353950/pg1
Get a PLASTIC comb and comb your hair many times as fast as you can. The PLASTIC will absorb electrons and will be statically charged!! Now... put that comb near a small stream of WATER. THE WATER WILL BEND TOWARDS THE PLASTIC.
The reaction above is really important to understand. It actually amplifies the reaction of the magnet battery!
Yes of course the pH level in water (acidity) will create a VERY WEAK CHEMICAL REACTION. This is why on my website I strickly say to use "drinking water". The chemical reaction is NOT enough to make this battery as powerful as it is.
The entire problem with ALL theories of today, is the theory about Magnetic Force! All theories of today are WRONG! They don't even understand what it is. I DO, it is PARTICLES.
Metal does not make magnetic force, it only holds it and circulates it! You have to find out what "it" is. Ed Leedskalnin claims it is might actually be electrons running against another particle (protons?), but also says even the electron theory is incorrect and it is something else!
Electricity is magnetism running in streams (dc). Metal magnets are AC. Very hard to explain in current day theory.
Don't try to correct me, just read and think about it.
Quote from: Jimboot on July 14, 2008, 06:37:53 AM
There is one last experiment I would like to try. Distilled water with non plated steel washers. Or is there a better material that is magnetic but unlikely to contribute to a galvanic reaction?
Well you could of course try nickel eh, that at least should not give any galvanic reactions with the nickel coated neos... ?
QuoteJust a question. Would a rusty old steel gate hinge and an alnico horseshoe cause a galvanic effect? I get voltage from that as well.
Well it can. Depends on the exact compositions of the materials I think. After all, at least iron and cobalt and I think nickel too have several
possible "oxidation states" so they can have slightly different ionisation potentials depending on what isotope you've got.
This gives a certain range of ionisation/emission potentials for both the iron hinge and the alnico magnet.
In theory there is more than enough room in this range to give rise to a potential difference and work function to generate a galvanic-type
electron exchange.
But without knowledge of the exact composition we can't give much more detail there.
Oh, and all that is my opinion of course so if you want you're more than welcome to disagree. ;)
Quote from: Koen1 on July 14, 2008, 07:41:07 AM
Well you could of course try nickel eh, that at least should not give any galvanic reactions with the nickel coated neos... ?
DUH! Now I feel dumb! Although what about steel to nickel? If the plating lifts on the washers?
Quote
Well it can. Depends on the exact compositions of the materials I think. After all, at least iron and cobalt and I think nickel too have several
possible "oxidation states" so they can have slightly different ionisation potentials depending on what isotope you've got.
This gives a certain range of ionisation/emission potentials for both the iron hinge and the alnico magnet.
In theory there is more than enough room in this range to give rise to a potential difference and work function to generate a galvanic-type
electron exchange.
But without knowledge of the exact composition we can't give much more detail there.
Oh, and all that is my opinion of course so if you want you're more than welcome to disagree. ;)
I'm not quite ignorant enough on the subject to disagree, sorry :-) Impressed the socks off me though!
What about the voltage levels? I can get 5V but 3.5V is very sustainable. Would this be a believable for a gal effect? I guess I should test one washer and one battery in water eh? If the levels are the same when in water as they are out with just a piece of wet paper between them,, that's another one for the gal argument. Certainly with my brass washer test that wasn't the case.
Quote from: 0ne on July 14, 2008, 07:32:31 AM
Listen closely.
You want a substance that will still allow the electrons to pass from metal to metal. You don't want a substance that takes electrons from both metals and holds them.
Look at this thread I created at abovetopsecret.com
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread353950/pg1
Get a PLASTIC comb and comb your hair many times as fast as you can. The PLASTIC will absorb electrons and will be statically charged!! Now... put that comb near a small stream of WATER. THE WATER WILL BEND TOWARDS THE PLASTIC.
The reaction above is really important to understand. It actually amplifies the reaction of the magnet battery!
Yes of course the pH level in water (acidity) will create a VERY WEAK CHEMICAL REACTION. This is why on my website I strickly say to use "drinking water". The chemical reaction is NOT enough to make this battery as powerful as it is.
The entire problem with ALL theories of today, is the theory about Magnetic Force! All theories of today are WRONG! They don't even understand what it is. I DO, it is PARTICLES.
Metal does not make magnetic force, it only holds it and circulates it! You have to find out what "it" is. Ed Leedskalnin claims it is might actually be electrons running against another particle (protons?), but also says even the electron theory is incorrect and it is something else!
Electricity is magnetism running in streams (dc). Metal magnets are AC. Very hard to explain in current day theory.
Don't try to correct me, just read and think about it.
Hi 0ne stuck my ear to the monitor but couldn't hear a bloody thing! :-) Only gaggin ;-)
Love your passion.
Have you tried distilled water like others have suggested? I'm trying to eliminate a gal effect as much as possible.
So far this experiment has cost me about $100 in gear so I don't want to be asking questions later! I've made the investment so I may as well be satisfied with my results, whatever the outcome.
Here's the next experiment I'm looking at; nickel washers, nickel plated neos and distilled water with the same paper measured with both a digital and analogue meter. All new leads!
Quote from: Jimboot on July 10, 2008, 07:31:14 PM
This guy reckons he charges a mobile phone with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRPE6OG7Mp0
Btw I can think of at least half a doz ways I could fake this but they seem deadly serious about charging the phone. One guy claims he had 27 volts with a 50ft antenna. I built the circuit but only got mv when hooked up to the telly aerial on the roof. Min d you I think I had the wrong diodes.
G'Day all,
@One: I can assure you a "dry cell" is galvanic. It is just not as wet as a "wet cell".
Ian
@ Jimboot
If you are interested in galvanic reactions your should learn about the electromotive series. The farther apart the two metals are in the series the higher the voltage will be between them in a battery. Here is a link to a not very good list. You can find better lists and discussions in basic college chemistry books and maybe on the web if you spend some time looking.
http://www.ipfw.edu/chem/104/kimble/Activity.htm
A battery needs a solution with free ion to work. The fewer the ions in the water the poorer the battery will work (lower current). It is hard to get pure water. Tap water has many impurities in it. Distilled water is mostly pure but there are grades of distilled water. Laboratory grade is much purer than what you get in a grocery store. But however pure the water is, it will probably not be pure once you put it into a container because most things have surface impurities even after coming out of a dishwasher.
Your last video was good at showing your setup.
@ ian middleton
Quote@One: I can assure you a "dry cell" is galvanic. It is just not as wet as a "wet cell".
LOL, thats a good one ----- this reminds me of the person who said I will listen with an open mind but won't believe a word I hear. ;D
Galvanic action is a word to describe a process which is electrostatic in nature as all processes are electrostatic in nature. If you believe matter is composed of opposite charges as physics states-- Proton/Electron then all matter must be electrostatic in nature thus all reactions must be as well because nature cannot utilize something that was never present in the first place.
@One
QuoteThe entire problem with ALL theories of today, is the theory about Magnetic Force! All theories of today are WRONG! They don't even understand what it is. I DO, it is PARTICLES.
Metal does not make magnetic force, it only holds it and circulates it! You have to find out what "it" is. Ed Leedskalnin claims it is might actually be electrons running against another particle (protons?), but also says even the electron theory is incorrect and it is something else!
Electricity is magnetism running in streams (dc). Metal magnets are AC. Very hard to explain in current day theory.
;)
Thankfully somebody here can see past the illusion of effects and examine cause, you are light years ahead of most of the people here.
G'day all,
@allcanadian: I'm not sure what you're point is here. What is incorrect about a dry cell being galvanic ?
Well Ian, I think there is a little confusion going on here.
A "dry cell" of the type you speak of is indeed a galvanic cell with
just he minimum amount of moisture to allow galvanic reactions.
It is indeed a "less wet" version of a zinc bucket filled with
acid and a carbon rod partially submerged in the acid,
but with a "dry cell" they use a substance that contains the
liquid and there is no actual body of liquid sloshing around in it.
It's just the name they decided to use for a less wet cell.
The "dry pile" however is slightly different in that it was not
intended as a galvanic battery at all, it is simply a stack of
plates of two different metals, sandwiched between pieces of
paper. It behaves like an electret in that it also builds up a
(static) charge which can be used and will re-build again.
Originally it was thought this was a totally different effect that was
not related to the galvanic effect, and indeed it seemed to be
more closely related to the "work function"/"emission energy threshold"
and the relative Fermi levels of the different metals, as well as
the pressure applied to the stack (which in turn led to it being
categorised as a "contact potential" effect).
But soon after that the "dry galvanic cell" became popular,
and it didn't take long for people to suggest the seemingly dry paper
should in fact contain a certain level of moisture due to the air humidity,
and will act in a similar way as the "dry" electrolyte paste used in
"dry galvanic cells".
And indeed some dry piles were dissected and found to contain minute
amounts of moisture in the paper, which seemed to confirm the galvanic
interpretation of what was before categorised as a peculiar electrostatic
effect of the application of pressure on metals with different Fermi levels.
Mind you, that effect is also real and proven, but after more critical
analysis of the "dry pile" it was agreed this is most likely an effect that
does play a role in the "dry pile", but it is not the predominant process
that gives rise to the electret-like behaviour.
Or at least, that's what I know of the development of "dry cells" and
their relation to the "dry pile".
So Ian, you're entirely correct and I'm not sure why allcanadian found it so funny. ;)
Quote from: xee on July 14, 2008, 11:09:32 AM
@ Jimboot
If you are interested in galvanic reactions your should learn about the electromotive series. The farther apart the two metals are in the series the higher the voltage will be between them in a battery. Here is a link to a not very good list. You can find better lists and discussions in basic college chemistry books and maybe on the web if you spend some time looking.
http://www.ipfw.edu/chem/104/kimble/Activity.htm
A battery needs a solution with free ion to work. The fewer the ions in the water the poorer the battery will work (lower current). It is hard to get pure water. Tap water has many impurities in it. Distilled water is mostly pure but there are grades of distilled water. Laboratory grade is much purer than what you get in a grocery store. But however pure the water is, it will probably not be pure once you put it into a container because most things have surface impurities even after coming out of a dishwasher.
Your last video was good at showing your setup.
Thanks for the link Xee. Your explanation about the metals being farther apart and voltage levels being higher means I can't let go of this experiment yet! I'll do some study.
@ Jimboot
Another term used for the series is Galvanic series. Here are some links I found for that term.
http://www.corrosionsource.com/handbook/galv_series.htm
http://www.brushwellman.com/alloy/tech_lit/AT0027_0800.pdf
These have the metal voltages listed so you can actually calculate the voltage the battery will have (the difference between the metal voltages),
test,I just wanted a link back to this thread.triffid
Quote from: Jimboot on July 10, 2008, 07:31:14 PM
This guy reckons he charges a mobile phone with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRPE6OG7Mp0
Here is the thread on this topic
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3691.msg62274/topicseen.html#msg62274
I haven't tried with nickel washers yet but with new meters new leads I am getting similar readings with a single washer from the array in a solution with mag and just a washer mag and paper. Looks like a gal battery to me.
I tried it with a cubic magnet and a keychain(in place of the keeper).I could make the minus sign go away or come back.But could not get voltage readings untill I put some water on the dielectric(cardboard).My voltmeter reads only 1/100 volts not 1/1000 volts.The highest voltage I got was .11 volts.It was easy with the water added to get .05 or .06 volts.I wish my voltmeter could read 1/1000 volts.I would have liked to know what millivolts I could get without the water.Interesting experiment however.I got .11 volts with the most water.However I almost got a reading without water.I could make the minus sign go away almost at will(and come back).Triffid
That cubic magnet is nickle plated and the keychain is made out of low grade steel.So two different metals.But I almost got a reading without the water.Maybe someone here has a better voltmeter than me?I suspect a voltage in the millivolt range is being generated without water?Maybe use glass as a dielectric?Triffid
I'll give it a try on my meters tomorrow and report back.
Twice before in other experiments I had made an unintended battery.I am talking about myself,not One here.So I read back over the thread here.Magnesium and graphite electrodes make a very high powered battery.3.5 volts or more just stuck in wet earth or dry earth like some have claimed.I think a voltmeter that reads millivolts and milliamps should be used for this experiment.Glass is a very good dielectric,So maybe someone here could use a glass slide from a kids microsope kit?Triffid
I think I have an answer here.To end the argument if this is a battery or not.
Put a layer of water soaked paper between two glass slides .Seal the edges with a waterproof glue.Let dry.Then perform this experiment.If the water is confined to inside the two glass slides then its not wetting the two dissimilar metals.Then the diamagnetic properties of the water layer should be apparent.I'm not able to do this experiment.But maybe someone else here is?And report back here?Triffid
Oops,looks like i goofed.Some of the guys here have gotten millivolt readings without the water being present.When the water is added.I am more interested now in this magnet battery now than I was before .A simple LRC circuit could be designed to increase the voltage at least 700 times.triffid
I meant to say when the water is added.you get the higher volts because of a battery action.I have a good friend who has several u shaped magnets who intends to do
some experiments along these lines.It will be interesting to see what he finds.Also I have already designed a LRC that turns .001(1mv) volt into 729.87mv.Of course the amps decrease in similar fashion.triffid
Okay, here's for a bump and some more thoughts... ;)
So let us assume for a minute that it really is possible to
pull a current from the 'potential difference' created when a
conductive permanent magnet has a flux path through a
"keeper" that is electrically isolated from the magnet, while
this isolator has a high magnetic permeability so the flux does
get through but the electrons just can't.
At first glance I would say that such a setup using a horseshoe shaped
nickel coated neodymium magnet with a keeper and a paper "dielectric"
in between them should be replicable in a setup where 'normal' block
magnets are used, as long as the two block magnets are equally strong.
Also it does not seem farfetched to consider replacing the nickel coating
with a block of nickel (or any other magnetic metal) placed in between
the magnets... after all, if the current thus produced in the wire is indeed
a result of the Leedskalninesque quasi-monopole particles flowing from the
center of the magnet part to the center of the keeper simply because those
same pole flows can't pass the dielectric for some unknown reason and the
"pressure" of magnetic particles in the center of the magnet is so much
higher than that in the center of the keeper that the magnetic particles are
forced to flow through that wire, then it shouldn't really matter if the rest of the
magnet is coated with a conductor... as long as those central parts are conductive,
and of course also magnetic. (Not necessarily magnetised, but magnetic.)
So, in other words, the functional elements and zones of such hypothetical setup
should remain when we replace the horseshoe magnet with two equal strength
block or bar magnets connected via a magnetic conductor on one end, and connected
via a layer of electrical isolator (aka dielectric) to a second magnetic conductor,
both conductors connected at their centers via a conductive (non-magnetic) wire.
Or at least, it seems to me that it should work if the horseshoe version really does work...
Why would we want to build a block/bar version and not just use a horseshoe?
Well I'd say that's obvious: horseshoes are a horrible shape for stacking.
If we want to increase the output, the easiest method is the tried and tested
"battery" approach, by which I mean a unit consisting of several single cells
connected together.
If we could make such a battery using block or bar magnets, we could stack several
layers of these atop eachother, all of them reinforcing eachothers magnetic field
and forming one neat magnetic pile, and have their output accumulate.
If that works, then it doesn't even matter if you can only get 0,5V@2,5mA from one
of those 'cells', as long as you can make them thinner and stack them.
I imagine a very thin wafer of permanent magnetic material as the basic magnet
layers, and thin metal plates and thin plastic in between...
There are still some points I'm unclear about though...
1) What happens when you replace the thin pieces of dielectric (the paper and plastic bag)
with some thicker dielectric that does allow for most of the magnetic flux to permeate?
So for example pieces of wood or styrofoam of like 5mm thick?
Does the "magnetic battery", either the horseshoe version or the balls-in-a-row version,
still produce any output when this is done?
2) If the thing works according to Leedskalninesque monopole particle flow "theory",
then there seems to be something awry here; Eds monopole interpretation of current
clearly is one of two seperate N and S monopole flows that rotate (or "spiral" if you will)
in the same direction, but they flow (or move if you will) in opposite directions.
Since this "magnetic battery" idea uses both magnet poles equally, and the current flow
apparently only occurs between the central parts of the magnet and the keeper
('central' as measured from the ends of the body of matter where the magnetic poles are),
it would seem that any "pressure difference" between the magnetic particle density inside
the magnet and that inside the keeper would be equal for both the N and the S particle
streams, and that should only result in a flow of both N and S particles along the wire
from the central part of the magnet to the central part of the keeper, where these flows
could then split again and go their own ways. Ergo, in this interpretation, the N and S
particles should flow in the same direction through the wire. And obviously that
is in direct contradiction with Ed Leedkalinins own statements about the monopole flows
in a wire that "sees" an electric current.
In summary, it seems the observation of current flow in the horseshoe "magnetic battery"
does not accord with Leedskalnins "theory" at all! :o 8)
3) assuming it would work, could we use ferrite permanent magnets in such a setup?
Obviously they are not electriclally conductive, but they are magnetic, so we might
be able to use them as both dielectric and magnet? I imagine something like a neodymium
magnet seperated from its keeper by ferrite magnets? I'm not sure, it probably won't add
much if anything at all, but the difference between the internally conductive neodymium
magnets and the internally nonconductive ferrite magnets seems important in this,
in my opinion still quite hypothetical, effect. Could it be that the internal conduction which
gives rise to the non-permanence of neodymium magnets is also crucial in getting
any such "magnetic current" to flow? In other words, that any current pulled from such
a "magnetic battery" is in fact real-time demagnetisation of the neodymium magnet and
corruption of its internal structure?
That might explain why the tiny currents are measured in the horseshoe- (and other) neodymium
magnet setup(s), but not in real ceramic permanent magnet setups... ??
4) Has anyone determined what role the different materials play yet? I mean: has anyone tried
to use a nickel keeper with their nickel-coated neodymium magnet, instead of an iron keeper?
Has anyone tried a silver- or gold-coated neodymium magnet with the iron keeper and with
other materials? Has anyone tried wrapping the neodymium magnet in aluminium foil, or in
copper foil, to see if it still works that way? Has anyone tried wrapping a ferrite, alnico, or other type
of magnet in nickel, zinc, iron, or any other metal foil and then tried to replicate the "magnetic battery" effect?
:D
Well I just received a bunch of fesh new neoymium magnets
of which I can be fairly sure they're of equal strength,
with which I repeated a few of the basic steps of this
"magnetic battery" idea,
and I get clear indications that there's something galvanic going on...
I tried different variations of the basic setup, used nickel coated
neos, gold coated neos, and both, I tried 2 different types of paper
(normal white printing paper and brown paper bag stuff) and 3
types of plastic which I tested for static charge retention/absorption
and found them suitable due to very low to near zero static.
I tested the neo's nickel or gold coating against aluminium in the
magnetic field (stuck between two magnets), tested it with one layer
of isolator/dielecric, with two, and with a double layer even.
I also tried one layer of aluminium without isolation vs one layer
with isolation, tested the aluminium layers respective to eachother,
as well as the nickel and gold versus the aluminium at various points
on the magnets.
I even tried a stack of isolated aluminium layers as a sort of capacitor
sandwiched in between the magnets, with and without direct contact
between the nickel and the aluminium on the North, South, and both
'side' of the magnet stack, I tried various setups with the nickel
and gold coated magnets mixed, and even only the gold and nickel
magnets with various types of isolator in between.
I did get extremely low DC output around the range between 0.5 to
50 mV briefly, but the output always dropped quite fast to reach zero,
and I was only able to get those readings using paper as a "dielectric".
The thicker the layer of paper, the lower the readings.
When the paper was replaced with plastic the meter read zero.
One nickel coated neo stuck to one gold coated neo with paper in between
gave something like 3 mVthat quickly dropped to zero, as I increased the
thickness of the paper layer the voltage decreased even more, and with plastic
it was naught.
Seems very galvanic to me...
Any suggestions? ;)
ppl!
stop messing with the field!
theres only so much of it, if we all started using it for power then earth would not react kindly
Quote from: lostmente on August 02, 2008, 09:46:38 PM
ppl!
stop messing with the field!
theres only so much of it, if we all started using it for power then earth would not react kindly
UUUmmmm do you mean the earth will start warming up or something like that? ........or maybe some of the forms of life might start vanishing .
One thing I am totally sure about .....................if we do nothing and just trust the powers that be to work things out, life as we now know it will be over for most of us in 20 to 50 years ....
What kind of life do you want for your kids and grandkids ?
We will be tetering on the edge of WW3 as long as oil is our primary fuel .
Once a better form of energy gets to the people the mid east will revert back to simply being the birthplace of some major religions ..........as it should be .
gary
Quote from: lostmente on August 02, 2008, 09:46:38 PM
ppl!
stop messing with the field!
What field? You're not one of those McTaggart fans are you?
Quotetheres only so much of it, if we all started using it for power then earth would not react kindly
Yeah right... nonsense. The earth doesn't "feel" anything when we play with small permanent magnets...
If anything it should be the magnets that get depleted, not the earth...
If we were to build a bunch of huge homopolar generator setups on the equator that use the
earths rotation as driving force, then we would be "braking" the earths rotation while producing
electrical output. But they'd have to be
huge and quite a lot of them to actually have any
significant effect.
If we build a small one and spin that, it has zero effect on the earth. But we do get output.
A direct examination of whether magnetism does matter is, simply DE-magnetising the U-magnet.
1) First, measure the volatge / ampere with you set-up.
2) Demagnetize the magnet by hammering it, heating up or specialized AC demagnetizer.
3) Measure the Volt/ Amp again. if you get similar result, then surely it is busted.
ps. you are better to polish the magnet twice ( b4 step 1 & 3 ) if you are going to set it on fire ;D
Has anyone tried putting several in a series in order
to measure amperage and watts capacity? How does
it compare to a normal D battery?
Look at the voltage this guy is getting from a magnet battery.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWF6UJ77vD0&NR=1
Quote from: sirmikey1 on August 11, 2008, 09:04:06 PM
Look at the voltage this guy is getting from a magnet battery.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWF6UJ77vD0&NR=1
I just watched it, and there's a few loose ends there :)
First of all, the guy shows two meters and says he's measuring the DC voltage on the left one,
and simultaneously the AC voltage on the right one. Now that sounds like a good double test setup,
but then you can never clearly see if the meters are showing millivolts or volts, and the guy
never mentions it either. He does mention at some point that, quote, "you can see the charge build up
on the left meter, up to one amp, then it starts over again". Now that is a hell of an odd statement,
since he's measuring voltage and not amperage... Seems to me he just made a mistake and meant
to say it goes up to one volt, probably. '
Second of all, voltage is just that: voltage. It is not current and not really usable "power". It's just static
charge. The video never shows any amperage anywhere, the guy mentions "one amp" but never shows it,
and he sure as hell isn't measuring it in the video...
Third of all, and extremely important, he does not say exactly what kind of neo magnets he's using, although
I think he's using nickel coated neodymiums since those are most common. So he still has nickel and
aluminium and a very bad isolator and potential "dry electrolyte" in a typical "dry battery" setup...
He should try replacing the post-it note with a real isolator, a good piece of nonconductive plastic or something...
I tried this with far fewer neos and I also got a very small voltage when I didn't use a proper isolator material,
but whenever I replaced it with a good isolator I got zero volts.
Even when I used post-it and brown paper as "isolators" (or actually "dry electrolyte" but hey) and I did get
very low voltages, I never got any amperage.
Voltage is easy to make. But to make so much of it continually that it turns into a current, that's something else.
Koen,
Please make those comments on the video. Ask him about amps.
He claims to be U of O, which I assume to be university of Oregon.
Here's another youtube video showing similar results, high voltage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQHLtSDwtyc
Mikey
Thats my vid guys.
OU is us here!, check out july 4 08 post 105 I think I answered some questions there and there are some other posts about the same time.
Neo's as I recall are N38 rings half inch. The left meter was reading DCmv the right meter was ACv.
I got a new meter to help me understand what was going on there as I was not too confident with my 12 year old Rat Shak meters that had seen better days.
My new meter gave me a new Revelation! "a Limiting Resistor" but as life goes all 3 meters for the most part showed the same results but to this day I am not really clear what they represent.
I was going to make a horseshoe magnet from some diametric rings I had but got diverted to the "water to fuel" thread.
ONE is who is out front in this thread, I don't know if they have resolved the galvanic reaction issue yet But If they look at Dr Stiffers work he is using a plastic dialectic (not Identified) in his jpeg image of one of his setups using a water filled Tupperware type bucket for a dielectric that produces voltage the link is on the early pages of this thread.
Tinu is a bright guy but that still leaves some questions?
Beyond that Post it notes worked for me.
Be Well
Tinker
AKA utoTinker
Why do you say, in the video, that the left meter shows the voltage build
"up to one amp"? You show no amps in the video, you're measuring voltage...
Did you only measure voltage? Then you must know you haven't really
produced "power" yet, only voltage. You can have 1000 Volts, but if there's
no amps behind it, it's still very little usable energy output...
Try using a real isolator ("dielectric") instead of a piece of paper...
I got what I think are galvanic voltage readings using nickel coated
neos and aluminium and a piece of paper, but as soon as I replaced
the paper with a proper electrical isolator the voltage readings dropped to zero.
I would like to see what your setup does when you do the same thing.
Ofc, only voltage means nothing.
But if a REAL insulator is used, then surely NO current can get through the gap, which means NO CLOSED LOOP for current ! How could it be possible? ???
I tried using PET (polyethylene terephthalate) from a soda bottle as a dielectric.
First by placing a 1 & 1/2" square between a 1"sq x 1/2" N50 Nickel plated NdFeB and a steel block 1"sq x 1/8"
no meaningful mV or mA readings at all.
then by adding another NdFeB (same type) and a second piece of PET (making a "sandwich" Neo-PET-Steel-PET-Neo)... same results.
experiment was then repeated with HDPE (High Density Polyethylene Plastic) obtained from a milk jug... same results.
just for fun, tried a wet paper towel between the 2 NdFeBs and got no readings of value (nickel-nickel not galvanic). However, I have a smaller 1/8" neo from my son's Magnetix toys and when placed between a wet paper towel and a zinc bolt, millivolts were picked up (but useless amps). I don't want to compromise the coating on the N50's so I didn't use them for the dissimilar metals test.
I'm going to draw the logical conclusion here that the observed results were some sort of galvanic reaction, at least they were in what I have attempted.
Is Tinkers device enough to charge a similar rated capacitor?
There is hot melt glue on the paper to hold the magnets from
sliding, and so this may be causing part of the effect?
Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWF6UJ77vD0
Quote from: Koen1 on August 13, 2008, 05:14:32 AM
Why do you say, in the video, that the left meter shows the voltage build
"up to one amp"? You show no amps in the video, you're measuring voltage...
Did you only measure voltage? Then you must know you haven't really
produced "power" yet, only voltage. You can have 1000 Volts, but if there's
no amps behind it, it's still very little usable energy output...
Try using a real isolator ("dielectric") instead of a piece of paper...
I got what I think are galvanic voltage readings using nickel coated
neos and aluminium and a piece of paper, but as soon as I replaced
the paper with a proper electrical isolator the voltage readings dropped to zero.
I would like to see what your setup does when you do the same thing.
Becouse the Post it Notes worked, the "Real Dielectric" did not.
In the vid I was careful to point out that I made NO CLAIMS I just shared information for anyone to accept or reject
If you have read the thread here you will see that I retracted the "amps" comment in the video it was my error and it's not like the video can be edited like we do here on the forum.
I wait with baited breath your replication so I can pick on it and tell you what you should have done.
P.S. while I'm here Dr. Stifflers dialectric setup I called a Tupperware type bucket, in retrospect it looks more like a microwaveable storage container like GLAD or Ziploc the microwaveable part may have propertys worth exploring, it's just a thought without any evidence and no warranty.
Be Well
Tinker
Quote from: sirmikey1 on August 13, 2008, 06:14:51 AM
Is Tinkers device enough to charge a similar rated capacitor?
There is hot melt glue on the paper to hold the magnets from
sliding, and so this may be causing part of the effect?
Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWF6UJ77vD0
Sirmike
What you see in the vid is all there is, I haven't done any further work on it. The Neo's and post-it notes fit in the aluminum rails snugly and did not require any adhesive. Something else I learned was to make sure that the magnets were free from debris or greasy kid stuff from handling the magnets after cleaning them there was a serious increase in activity on the meters.
Be Well
Tinker
This is the bucket I was talking about above.
http://67.76.235.52/images/tmbwtr.gif
Be Well
Tinker
Tinker,
At 2 minute and 30 seconds, you mention a piece/slice of
hot glue, and so I just wanted to bring that into the equation.
Mike
Quote from: sirmikey1 on August 13, 2008, 05:14:40 PM
Tinker,
At 2 minute and 30 seconds, you mention a piece/slice of
hot glue, and so I just wanted to bring that into the equation.
Mike
That was a piece of hot glue I cut off and used for a spacer to keep the neo stacks seperated in the AL rail you can't see it in the vid it was not used as an adhesive.
Be Well
Tinker
Okay, forgive me if my questions have already been answered, as I'm new here and I tried to read the whole thread to catch up, but it was taking me forever and after page 2 all the bickering was getting a bit old so I skipped to the end.
@ One, and anyone who actually owns U shaped magnets... My magnet supply kinda sucks, but I have gotten small results from tiny neo's and from ceramic magnets.. best so far was only about 20mv, 0 amps. I do not have any U magnets as that is obviously where the best results are coming from so I do not have a way to test for myself my following questions:
1. Have you tried attaching some neo's to each pole of your U magnet, then the dielectric and the keeper? In theory, it seems to me it would add to the magnetism increasing the voltage, while still effectively making use of the U shape loop. Just curious if anyone has been able to jump the voltage this way or if my brain is malfunctioning again as it usually does... lol
2. I did not see where anyone has commented at all about your method of recharging a U magnet with the two coils? Does it work? Because I was wondering what would happen if you introduced a low voltage, high amperage into the coils around the magnet? Would you end up with a nice voltage finally combined with amps allowing you to use it?
This thread led me over to the Testatica device, reading, and I'm seeing that they
take the original static voltage and split it off into several different power building
devices, some in series, to build power/amps.
Scroll down on this link to FIGURE 7, read the details/construction materials.
http://www.rexresearch.com/testatik/testart.htm
SM
Quote from: sirmikey1 on August 14, 2008, 04:24:56 AM
This thread led me over to the Testatica device, reading, and I'm seeing that they
take the original static voltage and split it off into several different power building
devices, some in series, to build power/amps.
Scroll down on this link to FIGURE 7, read the details/construction materials.
http://www.rexresearch.com/testatik/testart.htm
SM
I wondered into to my kitchen today and found a "bucket" that appears to be Identical to the one in Dr Stiffers image of one of his setups that I posted earlier today.
I played around with it tonight and it did read voltage with the same neo's from the first vid but results were far less impresive from my first vid 8 neo's vs 48 in the first vid.
Also according to the new meter I bought when I turn it to amps it displays .078 amps for a brief instant consistantly and then settles on zeros, it has a resistor in it I suspect that has something to do with it.
I did a wet (water in the Bucket) and dry both with the similar results.
I will see what I can do to post a video by the weekend.
The bucket I found today has no label or identifing markings sorry I can't provide a source but the microwaveable plastic I think is the key.
Be Well
Tinker
Quote from: Tinker on August 13, 2008, 12:45:37 PM
Becouse the Post it Notes worked, the "Real Dielectric" did not.
Right. Just like I've been saying all along. It only works with a paper "dry electrolyte"
and not with a proper dielectric/isolator, and so it must be a galvanic reaction.
QuoteIf you have read the thread here you will see that I retracted the "amps" comment in the video it was my error and it's not like the video can be edited like we do here on the forum.
Well yes, but I did not see you retract that untill
after I posted that remark. Thanks for clearing that up though. ;)
QuoteI wait with baited breath your replication so I can pick on it and tell you what you should have done.
I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you, since I had already tried this before you posted your video, and it seems
quite silly to "replicate" something I had already tested before you tried and filmed it. :)
Isn't your version the "replication" then, by the way? ;)
I've been pointing out that it doesn't work with a real isolator material and that it appears to need two different
metals to work, which leads to the conclusion that it is a galvanic effect.
And everyone has confirmed this so far.
If
you had read the thread, you would have read those things in my posts.
And you are welcome to "pick on" my reported observations there... Although I wonder what there is to
pick on; we have a bimetallic junction that seems to produce low voltage when a typical classic
"dry battery" seperator like paper is used, but no longer when an actual isolator is used, and
therefore it seems to be a form of the very classic "dry" Voltaic Pile. But instead of using a bench vise
to apply pressure to the stack, here magnets are used to apply the pressure.
We also have very low voltage and very low amperage, if we get any amps at all.
If there is anything you feel I have omitted here, or that there is a better or different explanation
for the observed readings, then by all means educate me.
Also, please don't think I am trying to "pick on you" or anything, I'm just trying to divide the
wheat from the chaff so to speak and to seperate known effects and psysical explanations
for the observed effects from the overenthousiastic but scientifically highly implausible explanations
suggested by some, like the idea that "electricity is all magnetic particle streams and those can be
pulled out of a magnet and used as electricity" and such misconceptions.
Quote from: Koen1 on August 12, 2008, 10:17:58 AM
I just watched it, and there's a few loose ends there :)
First of all, the guy shows two meters and says he's measuring the DC voltage on the left one,
and simultaneously the AC voltage on the right one. Now that sounds like a good double test setup,
but then you can never clearly see if the meters are showing millivolts or volts, and the guy
never mentions it either. He does mention at some point that, quote, "you can see the charge build up
on the left meter, up to one amp, then it starts over again". Now that is a hell of an odd statement,
since he's measuring voltage and not amperage... Seems to me he just made a mistake and meant
to say it goes up to one volt, probably. '
Second of all, voltage is just that: voltage. It is not current and not really usable "power". It's just static
charge. The video never shows any amperage anywhere, the guy mentions "one amp" but never shows it,
and he sure as hell isn't measuring it in the video...
Third of all, and extremely important, he does not say exactly what kind of neo magnets he's using, although
I think he's using nickel coated neodymiums since those are most common. So he still has nickel and
aluminium and a very bad isolator and potential "dry electrolyte" in a typical "dry battery" setup...
He should try replacing the post-it note with a real isolator, a good piece of nonconductive plastic or something...
I tried this with far fewer neos and I also got a very small voltage when I didn't use a proper isolator material,
but whenever I replaced it with a good isolator I got zero volts.
Even when I used post-it and brown paper as "isolators" (or actually "dry electrolyte" but hey) and I did get
very low voltages, I never got any amperage.
Voltage is easy to make. But to make so much of it continually that it turns into a current, that's something else.
Fair assement I am that guy,
I tried very hard to display the actual results on the meters for all to see but most weren't able due to my limitations and lack of expertise and equiptment.
Both meters were reading MV AC and DC
Your statment about current is correct I have pondered the same question. But I have seen more than one replication where an LED was been powered using magnets.
Today I looked back at Dr Stiffers work and recognized a vessel that he used in one of his builds.
I happened to find one in my home that appeared identical and spent some time working with it. It is a common microwavable storage container. I spent some time with it and had some sucess with it today.
I suspect it has propertys not found in other non microwaveable containers.
My "amps" statment was corrected here on this forum in another thread later that day, you might also note the time on the Vid it was 4am EST it was a long day.
I am working on a new Vid that I hope will be up over the weekend.
Be well
Tinker
Koen,
Tinkers is no replication, it's quite different/unique and with different results.
So what's your conclusion to this device? Point me to the thread if I've missed
anything? Not enough initial power to bother with? Like trying to start a fire by
rubbing two sticks together?
Regards,
SM
The energy does not come from the magnet. It come from 2 different metalls. That's all.
Mark
Hey, just kiss and make up so we can get on with learning and understanding concepts here, geesh... lol... If I ever need a debate team, I think I'm gonna recruit everyone from this forum...
Who's right? Who's wrong? Who cares?
Honestly, the funny part about most of what I've learned from everywhere about over-unity, I honestly feel the best and most practical answer will most likely be found by someone with no education, half retarded, and never learned from all the text books saying it isn't possible!
Tinker, dont stop making vids because they get nitpicked to death. It's all about learning what does and does not work. Most of us do not expect a perfect video, with flawless speach, and expert knowledge with absolute proof! I enjoyed your video, and the questions I had regarding it, you answered. It simply shows that you, like me, are actually working to learn and figure this stuff out, while many just sit and read posts all the time.
I've been working on about 50 different ideas and concepts. Some are friggen stupid, most dont work at all, and the rest ALMOST work... lol... Just like everyone elses... But I have a thurst for knowledge, and I'm learning alot.
Out of curiousity? I have heard it mentioned many different ways. I've heard magnets last 400 years without losing it's field, (which I dont buy for the most part), I've heard as soon as they are put to work they lose their field, and of course the 3 proven ways to cause a magnet to lose it's field.
My question is this, does anyone actually have some good info with tests showing one way or another and whether magnets actually lose their field when used to attract and repel against other like magnets? I cant seem to find any good info to be honest. Because it seems to me that the alternator in my car has made much more energy from those magnets in it than the energy it took to magnetize them? In other words, it seems to me the energy coming from a coil the magnet passed by, was not really robbed from the magnet, or the magnets would die much faster than they appear to.
Can someone point me to the right info please?
Captain,
Magnets will outlive all of us here; but can be weakened if you strike them.
I've been able to strengthen them by hitting and rubbing a stronger one against
the weaker. Can also use a demagnetizer. I've also read that you always
store horseshoe magnets with the bar across the opening, says it makes them
stronger, builds/captures more force. I don't know about that last one.
Here's a question for you guys, anyone here: How do transistors amplify signals?
Does recitifying the a/c double the signal, or is it switching multiple signals into a
series; both; or what?
Thanks,
SM
Quote from: Koen1 on August 14, 2008, 06:31:08 AM
Right. Just like I've been saying all along. It only works with a paper "dry electrolyte"
Yes so far, Have you seen Stiffliers work? one of his setups used a wet setup with a non permeable membrane "The Bucket" and was able to get a reproducible result.
and not with a proper dielectric/isolator, and so it must be a galvanic reaction.
Is "must be" a verifiable fact or an assumption? due to a lack of other information.
Based on what I have seen here at OU new information shows up here on a regular basis, That is what keeps most of us coming back.
I truly don't have anything more than my experiences as flawed may be are shared and to the best of my ability to be accurate and truthful.
As always the reader has the option to accept or reject my what I share, I don't have a problem with that.
Well yes, but I did not see you retract that until after I posted that remark. Thanks for clearing that up though. ;)
I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you, since I had already tried this before you posted your video,
So did I
and it seems
quite silly to "replicate" something I had already tested before you tried and filmed it. :)
Isn't your version the "replication" then, by the way? ;)
I was impressed with Stiffers work and followed his lead with my own version.
I've been pointing out that it doesn't work with a real isolator material and that it appears to need two different
metals to work, which leads to the conclusion that it is a galvanic effect.
The only thing that worked for me was the Post-it notes for an isolator I did around 20 different types of Plastic with no joy soda bottles to trash bags.
Don't know about the metallurgy I used Zinc coated Neo's, aluminum rails in my later attempts (after the Vid) the AL seemed to make things more stable as in dampening and also kept the neos easier to work with and Nu metal strips for connections. Using 2 rails in a diffrent configuration I increased the the reset time from what I showed on the vid by about 30% above what I showed in the vid.
And everyone has confirmed this so far.
My observation as well
If you had read the thread, you would have read those things in my posts
I did.
And you are welcome to "pick on" my reported observations there... Although I wonder what there is to
pick on; we have a bimetallic junction that seems to produce low voltage when a typical classic
"dry battery" separator like paper is used, but no longer when an actual isolator is used, and
therefore it seems to be a form of the very classic "dry" Voltaic Pile. But instead of using a bench vise
to apply pressure to the stack, here magnets are used to apply the pressure.
We also have very low voltage and very low amperage, if we get any amps at all.
I have seen the same thing in my travels and experience. My problem is unless I accept Immaculate illumination how did Stiffler and Gary power their Neo's without current/amps, Gary could be the pile theory but what about Stiffler.
If there is anything you feel I have omitted here, or that there is a better or different explanation
for the observed readings, then by all means educate me.
Also, please don't think I am trying to "pick on you" or anything, I'm just trying to divide the
wheat from the chaff so to speak and to separate known effects and psysical explanations
for the observed effects from the overenthousiastic but scientifically highly implausible explanations
suggested by some, like the idea that "electricity is all magnetic particle streams and those can be
pulled out of a magnet and used as electricity" and such misconceptions.
My first line in response to your post was it was a fair evaluation, If I knew it all I would be on my way to Maui by now.
Be well
Tinker
P.S. The "Bucket" looked promising on the first try, but I haven't had much success with it today but I'm still working on it.
Hi all...
i have a few things i wish to add to this now, dusty topic...
In my trial i used a rare earth magnet i got off ebay. It is powerful but it is a disc not a horse shoe.
The "spacer" (I'm not going to say dielectric or anything like that for reasons later described) is a napkin soaked in filtered water with 2 steel clips that are used at my work for securing steel strapping for shipments.
I have used an ordinary receipt as a spacer and i get mild results not as good as the napkin soaked in water. I have also found that maintaining the spacer in a "bath" of water seems to help this little experiment hold its voltage.
OK i better explain why i am saying spacer. I think that (and i will test this some how and post results) that it is not a dielectric that you need but a nonmagnetic or nonmetallic conductor. The better it can conduct the better this will work. Thats my theory on this. That is why the really nonconducting spacer experiments failed.
OK next proposition, to prove to people saying that this is an alchemical reaction where electricity is produced can they post a test that would prove this wrong. If nickle and tin/steel produces electricity then would someone doing this test with a nickle plated washer/nail as the bridge solve that??? if so i might be able to get some tests done.
OK strange findings...
My setup to date
I = Steel clip
~= Napkin soaked in water
O= My Disc magnet (really thin, about 5mm, cylinder magnet)
Note: The napkin is folded to make it a long rectangle the same size as the largest face of the magnet then folded so that it can be folded around the magnet. Like a sandwich.
I~O~I
I'll post pics if this is unclear.
When i use my multimeter and touch both clips i get about half the reading then if i touch one clip and the magnet. maintaining one probe on the magnet and moving the other between clips give about the same reading but as a negative. My conclusion to this is that there is 2 circuts in the magnet... Not new news i know but it would seem i have isolated them...
Some other ideas that i have on how magnetic fields affect electrons is.
A magnetic field weakens the "shell" that the electrons hold around their atoms. So if a shell is already weak this weakens it more. Explanation: Think of Faradays electric generator and how Tesla improved it. Now apply this principal : The electrons shells are weakened by the magnetic fields interference allowing them to move easier. So you magnetise a copper disk, without rotation there is no charge because there is no where for the electrons to go. No force acting on them. Add rotation (centrifugal forces) and now you have power generation. And a reasoning as to why the outside of the disk is positively charged and the middle is negatively charged. If i am right then magnetic fields can be used to lower the resistances of materials to electrical current. No doubt i will get some responce from someone telling me i am wrong, which i hope they supply proof or some evidence to back it up not just "the laws of physics are..."
Another observation made is that this experiment will only build charge up to a point and then drops it. I have also noticed that if there is no load on the circut then it drops to a point and sits there... i have found this interesting, i would like to know why this is, and if there is more resistance will it be more charge. How does it determin its charge point?
More experiments and variables to test as i have time and i will attempt to post as much info as i can.
Laters
Quote from: CrazyEwok on November 13, 2008, 02:04:05 AM
Hi all...
i have a few things i wish to add to this now, dusty topic...
In my trial i used a rare earth magnet i got off ebay. It is powerful but it is a disc not a horse shoe.
The "spacer" (I'm not going to say dielectric or anything like that for reasons later described) is a napkin soaked in filtered water with 2 steel clips that are used at my work for securing steel strapping for shipments.
I have used an ordinary receipt as a spacer and i get mild results not as good as the napkin soaked in water. I have also found that maintaining the spacer in a "bath" of water seems to help this little experiment hold its voltage.
OK i better explain why i am saying spacer. I think that (and i will test this some how and post results) that it is not a dielectric that you need but a nonmagnetic or nonmetallic conductor. The better it can conduct the better this will work. Thats my theory on this. That is why the really nonconducting spacer experiments failed.
OK next proposition, to prove to people saying that this is an alchemical reaction where electricity is produced can they post a test that would prove this wrong. If nickle and tin/steel produces electricity then would someone doing this test with a nickle plated washer/nail as the bridge solve that??? if so i might be able to get some tests done.
OK strange findings...
My setup to date
I = Steel clip
~= Napkin soaked in water
O= My Disc magnet (really thin, about 5mm, cylinder magnet)
Note: The napkin is folded to make it a long rectangle the same size as the largest face of the magnet then folded so that it can be folded around the magnet. Like a sandwich.
I~O~I
I'll post pics if this is unclear.
When i use my multimeter and touch both clips i get about half the reading then if i touch one clip and the magnet. maintaining one probe on the magnet and moving the other between clips give about the same reading but as a negative. My conclusion to this is that there is 2 circuts in the magnet... Not new news i know but it would seem i have isolated them...
Some other ideas that i have on how magnetic fields affect electrons is.
A magnetic field weakens the "shell" that the electrons hold around their atoms. So if a shell is already weak this weakens it more. Explanation: Think of Faradays electric generator and how Tesla improved it. Now apply this principal : The electrons shells are weakened by the magnetic fields interference allowing them to move easier. So you magnetise a copper disk, without rotation there is no charge because there is no where for the electrons to go. No force acting on them. Add rotation (centrifugal forces) and now you have power generation. And a reasoning as to why the outside of the disk is positively charged and the middle is negatively charged. If i am right then magnetic fields can be used to lower the resistances of materials to electrical current. No doubt i will get some responce from someone telling me i am wrong, which i hope they supply proof or some evidence to back it up not just "the laws of physics are..."
Another observation made is that this experiment will only build charge up to a point and then drops it. I have also noticed that if there is no load on the circut then it drops to a point and sits there... i have found this interesting, i would like to know why this is, and if there is more resistance will it be more charge. How does it determin its charge point?
More experiments and variables to test as i have time and i will attempt to post as much info as i can.
Laters
post pictures and possibly videos too thanks :)
I will try to get some tonight... they will be off my phone camera though unfortunately and it is only 5 mega pixils... I will be only getting some general pictures trying to get everything in one photo to prove no hidden wires or batteries. If there is some particular aspect of this you want photo's of in more detail you'll need to say so.
FastStone Image Viewer and downsize freeware:
http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm
Can you give some clearer and more detailed information about your setup?
For example:
- what type of magnet are you using exactly? (Neodymium? Is it coated with nickel or gold?)
- what exactly is the output you measured? (millivolts and milliamps please)
- you say output drops when no load is attached... So then what kind of load did you use, and does that
only keep the ouput at a certain slightly higher level, or does adding the load actually increase
the output? If so, that's very interesting, because that reeks of negative resistance and that is
fundamentally OU.
- how do you see a piece of wet napkin as a nonmagnetic, nonmetallic conductor? Paper is an isolator,
water is an isolator, I see zero conductor there. Are you using one of those nice white paper napkins?
If so, are you sure they don't contain certain electrolytes left over from the bleeching process, that cause
the napkin to become slightly "conductive" when it is wet? More so, if it is remnants of hydrochloric
acid bleeching or something similar, you might just have built yourself a low grade chemical battery.
In that case not only would the output be the result of a galvanic reaction, but the electrolytes from
the napkin would stimulate that. Does it also work with other napkins? Ones that are not chemically
treated? Or does this specific type of napkin only come in bleeched pearly white? ;)
One possible method to check if you're not getting mostly galvanic reactions, is simply by replacing
the nickel-coated magnet with a piece of pure nickel. Or if your magnet is coated in gold, use a piece
of pure gold instead. If it produces comparable voltage when you wrap your napkin around it, attach
the pieces of steel, and add water, then clearly you have a form of galvanic ("wet") cell.
Also, do not forget that when the steel/iron is attracted to the magnet, this produces pressure, and
different metals under pressure are known to produce voltage. So if your magnetless steel-and-nickel
version does not produce volts just yet, try putting it in a vice and putting quite a lot of pressure on the
stack. There is a chance that it will produce output in these circumstances. ("Dry" pile)
And regarding your "Faraday" homopolar disc generator remarks; How, in your opinion, would that account for the
fact that it also works the other way around? I mean: when you pump current through the setup, the disc will
rotate. Although a "weaker" electron shell would, at first glance, appear to provide insight into why current of
electrons is "flung" outward by centrifugial force, it does not seem to explain why the centrifuge would start
to spin when we "suck" an electron current out of it. That does not seem to be related to any "weakened"
electron shell of the atoms in the metal of the centrifuge... ???
Kind regards,
Koen
Good Morning People,
Ahhh Koen I see your here... Excellent... Now 2 things... 1. i do believe that water does conduct electricity... if it didn't it wouldn't matter if you submersed your motherboard in water to keep it cool... If your adamant about water not conducting try that one :P (i never said a good conductor just that it is one)
2. My theory on this is only a theory. IMO there are millions of theorys out there, it take time to prove them right or wrong. The running idea was that you needed something nonconductive to separate the magnet. people have proven this wrong by using better dielectrics, so one theory written off time to relook at the originat obervation.
Now i did say i had further testing to do, and with a 2 little girls and a full time job my disposable time is limited. I didn't rule out that this isn't a galvanic reaction it is still observations at the moment. That is why i asked on this forum hoping that people that better understand this reaction to propose specific varibles that would rule out this reaction. So far i have 2 test to try on the weekend if i can.
1. Change the water for another liquid perhaps one that doesn't conduct at all... i have seen a computer run in a "vat" of oil so i am considering exchanging the water for oil and seeing how this changes the voltage.
2. Using different connectors instead of steel clips. Zinc coated nails, copper & nickle coated washers... if i can get my hands on some. Now you seem to understand galvanic reactions.
Want to short list my proposed tests with any ideas that will confirm or disprove your ideas indefinatly?
Also in response to your questions about my theory of magnets "loosening" the electron shells. the current you are placing through the wires would have to be strong enough to counter the centrafugal forces of the electrons. Example : spinning disk with a lip, place small balls in it they will go to the edges right... but you can push the balls towards the middle, if the force you apply is greater that the centralfugal forces acting on the ball... so your current must be stronger or applied to be stronger to counter the forces working against your desired movement of the electrons.
"One possible method to check if you're not getting mostly galvanic reactions, is simply by replacing
the nickel-coated magnet with a piece of pure nickel. Or if your magnet is coated in gold, use a piece
of pure gold instead. If it produces comparable voltage when you wrap your napkin around it, attach
the pieces of steel, and add water, then clearly you have a form of galvanic ("wet") cell.
Also, do not forget that when the steel/iron is attracted to the magnet, this produces pressure, and
different metals under pressure are known to produce voltage. So if your magnetless steel-and-nickel
version does not produce volts just yet, try putting it in a vice and putting quite a lot of pressure on the
stack. There is a chance that it will produce output in these circumstances. ("Dry" pile)"
wouldn't a better method be to replace the known reactives with a nonreactive rather than a known reactive? thus cancelling out the galvanic reaction rather than making a small battery?
Yes my napkin is the nice pearly white one... the only one on hand... If this is galvanic i want to make it less likly to happen to see if voltage levels drop. Not more likely.
As i said help would be nice but rather than building something else can we keep the same basics (magnet - Nonmagnetic conductor - magnetic conductor) as i believe that this is more reliable way testing that this might work rather than a quik dismissal.
Great to see more activity on this thread:
Attached: LeedScalin's Perpetual Motion Holder
Further Tests i have just done are pointing to a Galvanic responce from something in the Napkin (water accelerates reaction) and the magnet. Not concluded that this is the ONLY electrical generation happening.
To quell my curiossity 3 more experiments before i use these magnets for their intended purpose...
1. copper/nickel washers as the conductor... with and without grease as a medium. (i'm hoping that since nickel it self shouldn't react and copper is very close to nickel on the nobel table i believe.
2. A sponge instead of napkin as the gap between (i will try to get one that has had no bleaches used in its construction). Trial this sponge with water and grease
3. Trial napkin with grease instead of water.
4. (this one i am not going to do but i hope someone does just to prove it one way or the other) coat the magnet in rubber or another non nickel reactive substance (maybe an enamal paint) and try the tissue (napkin / toilet paper) this would enable to use of the magnetic field uninerupted... (it would have to be able to have a current run through it though so you might want to check the resistance of the coating before deciding on what to use)
Will post results on monday
Quote from: CrazyEwok on November 13, 2008, 08:16:52 PM
Good Morning People,
G'morning. :)
QuoteAhhh Koen I see your here... Excellent... Now 2 things... 1. i do believe that water does conduct electricity... if it didn't it wouldn't matter if you submersed your motherboard in water to keep it cool... If your adamant about water not conducting try that one :P (i never said a good conductor just that it is one)
Lol ok, well, pure H2O is definately not conductive. But most water is not pure H2O, and contains other elements in solution. That's why salt water conducts quite
nicely. When you put electronic circuits in water, even if it is pure H2O, the surfaces of the metals (if not coated with something) will allow atoms to dissolve
and the water will become conductive. So yeah, putting circuitry in water will cause shorting and other nasty effects. But not because H2O in itself is conductive,
rather because of the ions in the solution. Electrolysis of H2O also works a lot better when a little electrolyte is added to the water in the form of salt, simply
because that increases conductivity and allows for a much better electrical connection between the cicuit and the H2O molecules.
Oh, and of course, that's all as far as I know and to my experience, and if you have interesting observations that seem to contradict these factoids then please
do tell. :)
Quote2. My theory on this is only a theory. IMO there are millions of theorys out there, it take time to prove them right or wrong. The running idea was that you needed something nonconductive to separate the magnet. people have proven this wrong by using better dielectrics, so one theory written off time to relook at the originat obervation.
Now i did say i had further testing to do, and with a 2 little girls and a full time job my disposable time is limited. I didn't rule out that this isn't a galvanic reaction it is still observations at the moment. That is why i asked on this forum hoping that people that better understand this reaction to propose specific varibles that would rule out this reaction. So far i have 2 test to try on the weekend if i can.
Alright. Well, I'd still like to hear your theory when you feel it is 'ripe' for presentation ;)
And if I gave you the impression I want you to come up with rock solid proof of your theory right this minute, I apologise.
I did not mean anything like that. It's just that I would like to hear about your theory if you think you've got a good one. :)
With two little gals running around you I can imagine you don't have very much time. :)
Quote1. Change the water for another liquid perhaps one that doesn't conduct at all... i have seen a computer run in a "vat" of oil so i am considering exchanging the water for oil and seeing how this changes the voltage.
Ah, ;D good that you mention this yourself, I was about to point out that using a nonconductive mineral oil
would allow for immersion in liquid without any metals dissolving and forming electrolytic solutions... If anything galvanic is going on, using oil instead of water
should indeed decrease any such galvanic effects.
Quote2. Using different connectors instead of steel clips. Zinc coated nails, copper & nickle coated washers... if i can get my hands on some. Now you seem to understand galvanic reactions.
Want to short list my proposed tests with any ideas that will confirm or disprove your ideas indefinatly?
Lol indefinately is very definitive eh, but sure :)
It's actually quite simple; galvanic reactions occur between two different metals in an electrolytic solution. That can be an acid, a salt solution, all kinds of stuff,
and water happens to be a substance which has a tendency to dissolve things, easily forming electrolytic solutions.
So if you have two different metals, put them in a solution of just about anything, they will produce a voltage.
To minimise the chances of your measured output being the result of galvanic reaction, we'll want to eliminate those crucial elements in the galvanic setup.
So we could 1) replace the water with some other liquid, preferably nonconductive/nonelectrolytic, and see if we still get output, 2) make sure the pieces of metal
are not dissimilar metals (standard galvanic series will show which metals generate what potential difference).
Then, the paper napkin part of the story is also a bit questionable, as the first batteries in the old days did in fact use paper or even saw dust between the
two different conductors. This is because the paper/saw dust obviously does allow the electrolyte solution to soak through so the solution contacts both
the conductors and the internal 'galvanic' electrical circuit is closed this way. One of the oldest written descriptions of a chemical "galvanic" battery
can be found in the Sanskrit Indian Vedic scripture "Agastya Samhita" from >3500 BC, and it describes how a layer of copper and a layer of zinc can be
seperated by saw dust and a sulfuric acid solution, and energy can be obtained from it. This just to illustrate how old the use of saw dust is in batteries.
Paper is dried wood pulp, a structured form of saw dust, basically. Wet paper in combination with anything that can dissolve into an electrolytic solution,
and in combination with two different metals will produce volts.
So if you want to make sure none of that happens, that the paper doesn't just act as a "spongy" conduit for the electrolyte, then it seems you may want
to use something that does not have such a "spongy" effect. (or use a liquid that does not form electrolytic solution) A real dielectric, that does not
allow passage of electrolytes, like a good nonporous plastic for example, might be a good test.
Seems to me that gives us some fairly simple options.
1) use a totally nonconductive, nonelectrolytic, nonreactive, liquid instead of water
2) check what metal coating your magnet has, then check the galvanic series for a difference between this metal
and the steel you're using as plates. If the galvanic series says you can expect a voltage, then it would appear
to be a galvanic reaction. (of course, if you're using a nonconductive liquid, this should no longer apply)
2b) if you find that your magnet is coated in nickel for example, then try to find a piece of nickel to use instead
of your pieces of steel. If the output disappears when you do this, it would appear to be a purely galvanic effect.
3) Replacing the paper with a real dielectric that does not allow for passage/transmission of electrolytes in the
liquid should keep them from exchanging energy between the two metals, and no output should be produced.
(mind you, if there is a secondary path via which electrolytes in the solution can interact with both metals,
they will and you will still have a galvanic cell, so this will only work if you have properly isolated both metals.)
QuoteAlso in response to your questions about my theory of magnets "loosening" the electron shells. the current you are placing through the wires would have to be strong enough to counter the centrafugal forces of the electrons. Example : spinning disk with a lip, place small balls in it they will go to the edges right... but you can push the balls towards the middle, if the force you apply is greater that the centralfugal forces acting on the ball... so your current must be stronger or applied to be stronger to counter the forces working against your desired movement of the electrons.
I get the impression you may have misunderstood what I meant; I may have been unclear.
What I meant was: it is true that a homopolar generator will generate a potential difference and a current between the center of the disc and the rim.
Direction of current flow depends on the orientation of the magnetic field in respect to the direction of rotation. For example, m field is homogenous
and oriented "up", disc is spun "clockwise", then current is produced "from center to rim", while reversing field orentation or reversing direction of
rotation will produce current flow "from rim to center". Similarly, it works as a motor, where current input "from center to rim" will produce a "clockwise"
rotation in the disc, when there is an "up" oriented m field. This appears to indicate that in the motor function, the current does not oppose the
"centrifugal" force, but rather that the disc spins in reaction to the applied outward "simulated centrifugal" force...
I'm just trying to say that, in my current view, there does not appear to be any "countering" of those centrifugal forces when used as a motor.
But of course I may simply not have understood your model exactly as you understand it, so I may have missed something. ;)
Quote"One possible method to check if you're not getting mostly galvanic reactions, is simply by replacing
the nickel-coated magnet with a piece of pure nickel. Or if your magnet is coated in gold, use a piece
of pure gold instead. If it produces comparable voltage when you wrap your napkin around it, attach
the pieces of steel, and add water, then clearly you have a form of galvanic ("wet") cell.
Also, do not forget that when the steel/iron is attracted to the magnet, this produces pressure, and
different metals under pressure are known to produce voltage. So if your magnetless steel-and-nickel
version does not produce volts just yet, try putting it in a vice and putting quite a lot of pressure on the
stack. There is a chance that it will produce output in these circumstances. ("Dry" pile)"
wouldn't a better method be to replace the known reactives with a nonreactive rather than a known reactive? thus cancelling out the galvanic reaction rather than making a small battery?
Well, sure, you can do that too.
There's typically 2 ways of proving something: verification, and falsification.
You can try to build it so that is definately can not work as a galvanic cell, by removing all the typical galvanic elements, and then seeing if you still
get an output from the magnet setup. That's your "verification of the nongalvanic magnetic battery" and "falsification of the magnetic battery being galvanic".
Or you can try to remove the parts that make it into a "magnetic" battery and tunr it into the closest nonmagnetic version which does seem to
have a lot in common with simple galvanic cells, and then see if the output you get from it is comparable to what you were getting when you
did use the magnet. That's your "verification of the magnetic battery being galvanic" and "falsification of the nongalvanic magnetic battery effect".
Ideally, you should do both. But in general either of the two should give more clarity already. ;)
QuoteYes my napkin is the nice pearly white one... the only one on hand... If this is galvanic i want to make it less likly to happen to see if voltage levels drop. Not more likely.
Alright, so you want a version where galvanics are minimised so that it is certainly not galvanic. Ok. Then go for the version where you eliminate the
typical galvanic elements and only the nongalvanic version remains. So that's either no different metals, or no electrolyte solution, or no porous paper "seperator",
or a combination of these. (Mind you, assuming there is some magnetic battery effect, there is a chance that the two different metals for example do play a role,
but not in the same way as they do in the galvanic effect. So there is a chance that you do need two different metals but the output does not accord with the voltages
indicated in the galvanic tables, nor is there actually a chemical reaction going on. I'm talking about the chance that there is some unknown magnetic effect.
This of course means that there is a chance that the output disappears when you do not use two different metals, but that the effect is not galvanic either.
That's the tricky part with unknown effects. ;D That's also why in an ideal situation I would like to try all of the variations on the tests I named, so that we get
a picture of what happens with all these variations, and how that had influence on the output. That way we could look at these different aspects.
But it's a good start to see if it works if the galvanic elements are removed. :))
QuoteAs i said help would be nice but rather than building something else can we keep the same basics (magnet - Nonmagnetic conductor - magnetic conductor) as i believe that this is more reliable way testing that this might work rather than a quik dismissal.
Not dismissing it yet ;)
Ok, so you prefer to test slight variations of your magnet setup instead of building a nonmagnetic variation and seeing if that does the same.
Your perogative of course. It's your magnet setup, your call. :)
Since your setup sounds very simple and I have some magnets around, I want to replicate your setup.
I have neodymium "rare earth" magnets, coated in nickel or gold. I have napkins, nice white ones. I have pieces of different metals.
Can you please tell me what type of magnet you're using?
And what metal it is coated in? That seems to be very important here.
Best regards,
Koen
Quote from: CrazyEwok on November 14, 2008, 01:09:18 AM
4. (this one i am not going to do but i hope someone does just to prove it one way or the other) coat the magnet in rubber or another non nickel reactive substance (maybe an enamal paint) and try the tissue (napkin / toilet paper) this would enable to use of the magnetic field uninerupted... (it would have to be able to have a current run through it though so you might want to check the resistance of the coating before deciding on what to use)
Interesting, so you propose a conductor which is nonmagnetic, so that the current can pass and so can the magnetism, but there won't be any
galvanic reactions between the nickel and the steel?
Hmmm...
Seems difficult, as just about every conductor will engage in galvanic reactions with different conductors (and semiconductors).
I'll ponder this a bit. :)
Quote from: CrazyEwok on November 14, 2008, 01:09:18 AM
To quell my curiossity 3 more experiments before i use these magnets for their intended purpose...
1. copper/nickel washers as the conductor... with and without grease as a medium. (i'm hoping that since nickel it self shouldn't react and copper is very close to nickel on the nobel table i believe.
2. A sponge instead of napkin as the gap between (i will try to get one that has had no bleaches used in its construction). Trial this sponge with water and grease
3. Trial napkin with grease instead of water.
Its Monday!!!
Ok results from weekends trials.
1. copper/nickel washers as the conductor... with and without grease as a medium. (i'm hoping that since nickel it self shouldn't react and copper is very close to nickel on the nobel table i believe.
Result: No measurable voltage (there was a lesser voltage measured with the Copper washer with the water and napkin setup)
2. A sponge instead of napkin as the gap between (i will try to get one that has had no bleaches used in its construction). Trial this sponge with water and grease
Result: Voltage with water not with grease
3. Trial napkin with grease instead of water
Result: No measurable voltage
My conclusion is that using MY disc magnet (which i have found is coated with nickel) that it appears that voltages measured were from a galvanic source. I will go to far as to say that this is my findings and do no run in accordance with the original persons ideas. Before dissmissing this idea completely i do advise more testing. Especially with horseshoe magnets.
Well back to the Homopolar generator. :)
Quote from: Koen1 on November 14, 2008, 08:30:54 AM
I get the impression you may have misunderstood what I meant; I may have been unclear.
What I meant was: it is true that a homopolar generator will generate a potential difference and a current between the center of the disc and the rim.
Direction of current flow depends on the orientation of the magnetic field in respect to the direction of rotation. For example, m field is homogenous and oriented "up", disc is spun "clockwise", then current is produced "from center to rim", while reversing field orentation or reversing direction of rotation will produce current flow "from rim to center". Similarly, it works as a motor, where current input "from center to rim" will produce a "clockwise" rotation in the disc, when there is an "up" oriented m field. This appears to indicate that in the motor function, the current does not oppose the "centrifugal" force, but rather that the disc spins in reaction to the applied outward "simulated centrifugal" force...
I'm just trying to say that, in my current view, there does not appear to be any "countering" of those centrifugal forces when used as a motor.
But of course I may simply not have understood your model exactly as you understand it, so I may have missed something.
Quote
When you start to rotate the disk electrons start to move from the center of the disk to the edge of the disk and you obtain an electrical current. The flow of electrons is possible because in metals (not unlike in a plasma) electrons are not bound to the atoms and can move around freely. This way of generating electric currents is based on a physical principal called electromagnetic induction. This principle states that if a conductor (here the rotating disc) moves through a magnetic field (here provided by the horseshoe magnet) a electric current is obtained. The law of electromagnetic induction is often referred to as Faraday's law.
-http://www.cora.nwra.com/~werne/eos/text/dynamo.html
If that is true (changing the orientation of the magnetic fields changes the flow direction) then that would kill atleast half of my theory. I was under the impression that the magnetic field was applied and the current flowed off the edge of the disk, regardless of direction. But if the direction off flow is controlled by the orrientation of the magnets or even the direction of rotation then... that is interesting. Hmmm i have not found information pertaining to that on the internet yet (this is all still theory to me right now and as there is no real explanation to what magnetic fields are or how they effect the flow of electrons/electricity i am trying to come up with at least a start to understanding it)
Can anyone pleasae confirm or dismiss this statement please:
With a disk Dynamo the orientation of the magnets or the direction of rotation changes the direction of flow of the electrons?
Well I have experienced this when toying with a homopolar dynamo,
but of course backing up my own story doesn't really count ;) ;D
so it would be nice for someone to post confirmation. ;)
Hello.
I have tried the following varriation of a magnet battery array.
3 neo small cylinder magnets between 3 metal iron plates. Dialectric: water soaked kitchen soft paper.
I have achieved with this array 0,37 volts steady and some amps. But after a period of about 1 hour it has climbed down to about 0,24 volts
Here is the photo of the array I tried:
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/5026/dsc05805rg7.jpg
After about 2 hours of keeping the apparatus steady in the table, I disconected the magnets and I kept only the two metal plates about 25 cm apart!
Then to my big surpise I saw that I keep getting some 0,37 volts (with minor amps), despite the fact that there is 25 cm of air between the two metal plates!
In the next minutes I will upload my video showing the wireless thin air measurement between the metal plates.
I have moved the one metal plate with my hand. After raising it a little from the table as you can see in the video, the volts become zero,.. after moving it very close to the table again the volts is raising again! Keep in mind that the two plates are about 25 cm apart and only air is between them! When I am moving the one plate further away (about 50 cm) the volts are becoming zero, when I move the plate closer (about 10 cm) I get some more extra volts! When I move the two plates far away from the exact close space of the original experiment I get 0 volts!
Can you explain that?
It seems like static wireless electricity in the air evolved around the close space of the experiment after the 2 hours of magnet battery operation!
Mr. One, please explain this phenomenon!??!
Here is the video. Download it to see for yourself the wireless thin air measurement of 0,37 volts between the 2 plates about 25 cm apart and this phenomenon is observed ONLY at the exact close space that the magnet array battery experiment was done for 2 hours!! I hope there is a known physics explanation for this.
http://www.easy-share.com/1903722653/MOV05810.MPG
Quote from: 0ne on May 25, 2008, 09:14:52 PM
Hello All!
I have decided to release some information to change the world. I am doing this 100% free of charge. If the information I give you is helpfull in any way, which I'm sure it will be, feel free to thank me with a donation on my main web page.
If you have any questions, you can ask me here, or on my forum.
So here it is, the Magnet Battery:
http://www.lawofmagnetism.com/magbat.html (http://www.lawofmagnetism.com/magbat.html)
Nice discovery. However, If you put your fingers on the two pins on a volt meter, it will read the voltage between the acids in the fingers an the metal you are holding in. So the most interesting part is the measurement nr. 1. However, this measurement is also frequently found when the wires from the volt meter isn't connected to anything.
I have to try this at home. I have a lot of neo magnets (no horseshoe magnet) I can make a horseshoe magnet shape out of. I will post the result here.
Br.
Vidar
I was browsing for U shaped magnets today and came across these,
http://boreal.com/search.asp?t=ss&c=0&ss=horseshoe+magnet (http://boreal.com/search.asp?t=ss&c=0&ss=horseshoe+magnet)
They accept hobbyist orders, but are primarily a provider to school science curriculums.
Just wanted to share