@Grumpy

Which one? The one that everyone thinks is the only Tesla coil but wasn't actually designed by him. Hell, a true Tesla coil is just about every coil design there is.

Mag orientation didn't matter much. There was a bit better Q when the magnet and vertical solenoidal coil was pointed like a compass.

I did also try radial mag on the flat/conical and axial on the solenoid coil and both.

@GB

@Grumpy is right. Get rid of the disk. With a disk you must make a connection (brushes by any other name). That connection must be almost exactly zero ohms. Resistance is Futile. I always wanted to say that 

BEP

  Or add a disk. 

Another option to getting rid of the disc, is to keep the disc and avoid the relative motion between the disc and external circuit.  This could be accomplished if we could get the magnetic field to rotate with the magnet.

Have 2 rotating magnets with their magnetic fields rotating through 2 stationary discs.  Then we could connect the discs in series and extract the current between the discs without brushes.

I'm not sure about this, but I believe the magnetic field would rotate with a Halbach array.  Does anyone know the answer to this?


GB 

Quote from: gravityblock on November 04, 2009, 08:11:10 AM
Another option to getting rid of the disc, is to keep the disc and avoid the relative motion between the disc and external circuit.  This could be accomplished if we could get the magnetic field to rotate with the magnet.

Have 2 rotating magnets with their magnetic fields rotating through 2 stationary discs.  Then we could connect the discs in series and extract the current between the discs without brushes.

I'm not sure about this, but I believe the magnetic field would rotate with a Halbach array.  Does anyone know the answer to this?


GB

Rotate something that doesn't have mass, or at least not very much mass.

Take a look at this depiction of a TPU.  The force field between the collector and the control coils, rotates as it propagates along the control wires, like squeezing water through a hose.

Just transfering the linear momentum of the photons that make up that force field to electrons and positrons in the collector...bada bing...bada boom...   Pair production without a billion dollar budget, or a Titan LASER.

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/38691


EDIT:  no need to store antimatter, just make as you need it.  After all the Atomic Energy Commision wouldn't pay SM a visit without good reason...and why them and not just the NSA, or some other security organization?

Always best not to rotate the mass.  Either way, it will take energy to create the rotating force field with coils or to rotate the PM mass.  Prove the concept, then improve on it.

Mathematically, it's already proven that doubling the radii of the discs and magnets will increase the power output to the 4th power while the input power requirements only goes up by the square thereof. 

Do you think this can be done with coils producing a rotating field without spinning the mass, since the strength of the field that is produced with the coils are proportional to the energy being put into the coils?  Possibly with other methods, but could it be built and cost effective to replicate from the average garage.

It's the counter torque and brushes that kills the OU properties of the HPG, thus doubling the radii of the discs and magnets also increases the counter torque to the 4th power.  Rotate the magnetic field and the brushes can be eliminated.  I believe the counter torque can be eliminated if the field rotated and the disc remained stationary with no relative motion between the disc and external circuit.  We can achieve OU with the HPG even if the PM mass is rotated, but we must avoid the brushes and keep the counter torque to less than or equivalent to the input requirements of the system.

First, the concept needs to be proven, then we can improve upon it with better methods.  The TPU has yet to be replicated showing OU.  Is this correct?

I believe if all the research and replication attempts have been put into the HPG that has a field rotating with the magnet and a stationary disc/external circuit, then we may be much closer to achieving OU than a "motionless" variant of it.  Rotating the magnet mass may require less energy than it's motionless counter-part according to the mathematics.  Just my thoughts on it, but I am open to better ideas.......and the TPU may be a better path to take in the long run.

GB