I'm kind of confused here with who believing what. I'm just going to stay with the simple believe of voltage being induced on the disk itself. The other thing I'm thinking about now is whether the field caused by moving electrons interact only on each others field. Or wether the moving electron itself is interacting with the field of another moving electron. If the latter is the case then shielding can be used to screen one electron from the field of others. But their fields would still be exposed, so it would only work if indeed the electron is interacting with the field.

Quote from: gravityblock on May 15, 2009, 02:01:59 AM
@BEP,  Persistence is a powerful force.  A persistent drop of water can carve out deep valleys over thousands or millions of years.  If we didn't believe as strongly as we do, then we wouldn't be as persistent.

Sorry GB

To me your coin experiment is saying the flux rotates on its axis with the magnet because the flux rotates on its axis with the magnet.

As far as persistence goes it is only persistant, not factual. I can spend my life telling people the sky is red. That doesn't mean it is or will be. Maybe it only means I should remove my glasses with red lenses.

I will agree to disagree on both points and wish you all well on your experiments as I see it all fruitless. I have already travelled that road.

Quote from: BEP on May 15, 2009, 06:04:39 AM
I will agree to disagree on both points and wish you all well on your experiments as I see it all fruitless. I have already travelled that road.

Many people will travel on the same road before a breakthrough occurs.  Just because you have traveled down this road and didn't find a breakthrough, doesn't mean someone else won't.  The road doesn't produce the fruit.  The people who travel on the road produces the fruit.

Just because your efforts were fruitless, doesn't mean someone else's efforts will be fruitless.  I wish you the best of luck in finding a road that is fruitful to you.

GB

I believe that the voltage is induced on the disk and not the external circuit.  I also believe the field or flux rotates with the magnet.  I am at odds with myself on this, but have a possible explanation.

The free electrons on the disk that are not strongly bound to the nucleus of the atom could be flowing off the disk in a parabolic path from the axis to the rim due to the centrifugal force (CF).  Now I realize some will say the (CF) is not a real force.  That is irrelevant because the effect is real.

I also realize some will say that this will occur even without the presence of a magnetic field.  This is true, but without the presence of the magnetic field, the electrons will flow in a parabolic path at random times and in random directions, thus no current or voltage will be detected.

With the presence of a magnetic field, the electrons will cut the lines of force due to the CF, which will induce a force that causes other electrons to move in the same direction and not at random times, thus current will be detected. 

The electrons then may travel in a more circular path from the axis to the rim as it cuts through the lines of force.  This would cause the electrons to cut through the lines of force many more times as compared to a parabolic path.

Questions that need to be asked that could support this idea.

Why do the electrons flow from the axis to the rim?  Is it due to the CF?

If the electrons flowed from the rim to the axis, then a centripetal force could be responsible, but this force or effect is not present.

How could a single external wire cutting through the magnetic field produce so much current? If this is the case, then a single external wire that has many turns, would then cut the lines of force more times and induce more current if the magnet and disk rotate together.  This should put to rest if the field rotates with the magnet or not and if the voltage is induced on the disk or external circuit.  This should be easy to test.

I am not saying the CF starts the process.  I am saying it is possible, but it leaves me at odds with myself.

Maybe somebody can take this idea, correct the errors, and come up with a solution.

This is just another wild and crazy thought of mine.

Thank you to those who thought about my ideas.
What I tell you is based on solid experimentation; I have working prototypes for everything I mention except a finished device (which I can not afford to build yet).
  The magnet is just like a lens in the manner that if you rotate a lens on it's axis of focus, the image does not rotate; so when you rotate a magnet on it's axis of magnetization, the field does not rotate.  A simple way to demonstrate this involves a strong  round (disk or cylindrical) magnet and a thick piece of aluminum.  Slide the magnet laterally on the aluminum and you will find great resistance due to induction (hysteresis) but if you spin the magnet (on its axis of magnetization) on the aluminum (or other nonferrous metal) you'll find there is no magnetic resistance.  This is because the field does not rotate with the magnet.  This is how/why the unipolar generator works even though there is no relative motion between the inductors and the source of field.  This is a serious textbook anomaly.  This starts to explain how systems of circulating charged particles get big because the circulating particles are circulating around the field they are also producing (just like a coil).
  With respect to centripital forces; electrons have basically no mass. There is no detectable difference between the electrons being induced to the axis or to the circumference.  They are happy to go either way.  The EM forces greatly override their momentum.
To see why you can never violate Newton with coils, go back to the first reference I posted showing 2 perpendicular current elements, it explains it pretty well.  The perpendicular current elements do violate Newton, so they even make a point to say that you cant make isolated current elements which is dead wrong.  To make an isolated current element you simply need a straight wire segment with sliding (or rolling or arc gap) brushes at each end.  My patent involves many such elements (www.magvortechs.tk) in series.
  Another explanation for this could be that you can not violate Newton using 2 magnets moving past each other; many of us have tried this to no avail.  Coils act just like permanent magnets, so the same is true there.  You have to take advantage of the unipolar fixed field effect, the perpendicular current element Newton violation, and a uniform geometry to realize over-unity.
-BWS