Quote from: hoptoad on June 25, 2008, 07:44:59 AM
@Aether
If you double the number of turns (in a single layer), the total resistance will be doubled not quadrupled.

Only if you are a fool.
As a permenant magnet generator has a limit to how much MMF it can induce in the secondary there would be no point in having a wire that is now twice as large and a coil that is twice as large as it should be.
And so anyone would choose a wire with half the cross section and hence current carrying capability as only half the current would be put through it.

Also as the coil would be the same size it would fit in the same area as the previous HC coil it is replacing, all of that seemed too obvious for me to bother pointing out.

Quote
Take two identical pieces of wire of equal length and measure their resistance. If each length of wire was 1 ohm, do you seriously think when you put them together in series they will suddenly make 4 ohms   

The last I time I did my math I was sure 1 ohm plus 1 ohm equals 2 ohms. 

In a multilayer inductor, the resistance will be slightly more than doubled, because consequent layers have an increasing diameter, which is the equivalent of having one of the two wires slightly longer than the other.

But the total inductance will increase proportional to the total number of turns squared.

Only in a closed flux path.
In an open flux path the outer turns will find less voltage induced per turn.

QuoteSo it will be quadrupled (sort of - other variables contribute : See the formula table in the link below. Every different formula for a coil shows the number of turns squared is inherent to calculating induction so in that respect (only) you are right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductor

Cheers

Quote from: Koen1 on June 25, 2008, 10:23:00 AM
Well if that's really all there is to the "Perepiteia" generator,
then I must say the word pretentious to describe the name is
an enormous understatement,
and I'll just leave you guys to arguing.

oh, and SORRY FOR BUGGING YOU ABOUT THE CAPS THANE

That isn't all there is.

There is much I could cite about the rest of what there is about this but unless you ask me I'll save my fingers.

I will however point out that it has been demonstrated that the rotor turns faster and uses less energy with the stator present than absent in some tests.
In other words assuming the results of that experiment be trusted then the stator coils are somehow adding energy to the system.

Much of the debate is if they are applying accelerative forces directly to the rotor or if 'something' is getting into the motor to increase output.

I am not aware of any evidence or logic that can support the theory that the acceleration comes from forces applied at the generator.
i am aware of much evidence and logic for how it may occur at the motor.

Thane initially believed the motor was the source of the acceleration but once his pet theory was killed he stopped believing that however and unless he knows something I don't he has no evidence supporting a generator based theory and no real argument against the motor based evidence.

As for this being a long way from OU. well if acceleration can be greater than the deceleration from the stators as already demoed then it seems that OU would be predictably reached by having enough of such stators.

Quote from: Koen1 on June 25, 2008, 08:01:58 AM
So either it does or it doesn't...
How can it be that the inventor is still arguing about the theoretical
possibility of his invention,
after he has already build it and shown that it works?

The arguments are not to if it accelerates on shorting, the arguments are 'why' it does.
There are some conventional answers that can explain some of what has been found but there is more evidence that can not possibly be explained by conventional theory.

Quote
Were the claims false? Does the motor not produce a "kick"
where it should "brake", and does it not produce more output
than it should?

If it does not work at all, then why is the discussion still active?
And if it does work, then why don't the guys with theoretical
objections replicate it and try to answer the theoretical questions
themselves?

The likes of PB (OUmon) will never replicate as he is only here to try and kill it, the only question is if he is paid or just deranged.

Many of us have successfully replicated it, there are 5-7 replications and another 2 who have possibly found the same or similar effect with a different setup.

Quote
If they don't build and test it because they believe it is impossible
on the grounds of theory, then it is useless to argue with them
anyway because they do not believe that the inventor actually
has a working version, they don't believe it is possible, and they will
continue to present their circular argumentation, which will never
admit the possibility.
If they don't believe the theoretical interpretation by the inventor
because they have built and tested it and found it not to work at all,
then at least there is solid reason to disagree with the inventor.

But I don't really see anyone building the thing

Only because everyone already built one.

Quote, I just see people
repeating that it can't work and I see the inventor repeating that it does.

Well, at least he built his version... And I can understand his conviction
that it works if he has a working version in font of him.

In any case, it seems to me that bickering over how a claimed effect
does not accord with the laws of nature is not very productive.
Every important electrical effect was originally discovered because of the
fact that it produced "anomalous" phenomena that did not accord with
estblished natural "laws" as they were understood at that time.
Scientific progress lives on anomalies and on discrepancies between reality
and theory.

Indeed.
My argument that you may be referring to is not that it doesn't work, just that it works in a way other than the inventor believes.
I am keenly interested in anomaly.

Quote
To dismiss a possible newly discovered effect as impossible because it
does not appear to accord with natural laws at first glance is not as obvious
as some seem to think. If everyone had done so, we would not have been
able to refine the hypotheses into the quite nicely formulated and detailed
theory of electromagnetism to begin with.

And I just cant help it:
THANE, THERE IS A KEY ON YOUR KEYBOARD THAT READS "CAPS LOCK",
PLEASE PRESS IT AND YOU'LL SEE THAT your text stops looking annoying and
reads a lot easier.

He does it for speed, and I doubt he's gonna stop.
it would be nicer if he simply never had any uppercase characters, as that only looks wrong at the i's.

Quote from: aether22 on June 25, 2008, 03:54:05 PM
Only if you are a fool.
As a permenant magnet generator has a limit to how much MMF it can induce in the secondary there would be no point in having a wire that is now twice as large and a coil that is twice as large as it should be.
And so anyone would choose a wire with half the cross section and hence current carrying capability as only half the current would be put through it.

Also as the coil would be the same size it would fit in the same area as the previous HC coil it is replacing, all of that seemed too obvious for me to bother pointing out.Only in a closed flux path.
In an open flux path the outer turns will find less voltage induced per turn.

Quote from: aether22
... if you double the number of turns both the inductance and resistance will be 4 times greater and the phase will be the same.

@Aether
You just love changing the rules regarding answers to your questions, as you go, don't you!. Your statement only suggested what doubling the number of windings would do. You gave no other parameter requirements to be considered, e.g changing the guage. My answer is consistent with just the statement / question - what will happen when doubling the number of turns.

Quote from: hoptoad on June 25, 2008, 05:33:10 PM
@Aether
You just love changing the rules regarding answers to your questions, as you go, don't you!. Your statement only suggested what doubling the number of windings would do. You gave no other parameter requirements to be considered, e.g changing the guage. My answer is consistent with just the statement / question - what will happen when doubling the number of turns.

I was maybe lazy due to having stated it in many previous messages, I always mentioned a coil of the same mass and volume.