Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 01:40:35 AM

...No the device is not in it's current form a device which will make a motor more effective overall because right now the device has been designed to do 2 things, to act as a mechanical load and to improve the motor as it powers said load.

Yes, aether22, it looks like we agree on the first part - I have reached the same conclusion. This device puts a load on the motor, and that load can then be altered by means of feedback into the motor  from the back-emf in its associated coils. However, this does not seem to be an improvement to the motor - would it not be better to remove that load altogether, since it is only producing waste heat and is not providing any useful work? It's analogous to adding a brake to the system - a brake acts as a mechanical load, producing waste heat, and when you ease off on it, the motor goes faster and the waste heat is reduced - but the motor will of course work best if you remove the brake altogether.

Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 11:32:38 PM
(Incidentally if 'they' are being genuine (they aren't, considering OU 'dreaming' on an OU forum is clearly skeptic) then it would make polar et al happy.)

The powerful thing about the scientific method is that it does not depend on the personal beliefs of the people involved. It doesn't matter at all if I'm a skeptic or not because results can be proved or disproved with experiments - and those experiments can be replicated by others to support or to discredit the results.

It is extremely easy to set up an experiment that measures the power in and the power out, and allows you to make an objective measure of the system efficiency with and without Thane's device in the system. I would do it myself except that (a) I do not have the mechanical skills or tools to do it and (b) if I did it and it disproved the theory, then you'd simply say I cooked the books. So I think the onus is on you, or one of the other proponents of the device, to perform this experiment. Why do you resist that so vigorously?

Hoptoad;

My setup IS using solenoid coils with hollow cores but I have installed the solid armatures in them for my tests.  Should I remove the solid cores?

Am I just wasting my time here Or is the effect worth replicating??

Vince

Quote from: hoptoad on March 04, 2008, 04:26:16 AM

Quote from: tinu on March 04, 2008, 03:33:56 AM
BUT JUST DECREASING LOSES TO SOME EXTEND [/color] (which seems impressive from visual point of view but totally irrelevant).? [/color]

........         totally irrelevant     hmmmmmm........KneeDeep

Forgot to reply earlier:
I said ?totally irrelevant? because output is still in mW-W range while input power is around 200W. Everything is hundreds of years behind what we already know and use. To put it more freely, that motor should rotate the shit out of a rotor like the one we see in the movie for much less than 200W if not poisoned by improper use of external magnetic flux. If I knew the mass and radius involved I?d compute moment of inertia, angular acceleration and achievable RPM. But that is not telling much to some people around. Instead, consider a small grinder (mine is 120W at around 2900RPM) and see that it accelerates fast, it takes extremely little power to maintain that speed when idle and that it indeed put out maybe around 100W of useful work when grinding. One can mess it with magnets but it would be wiser to do it only after documenting its un-hampered performances. And then a look at the two sets of figures may speak for itself.

In the last posts Polarbreeze actually said it very well: figures speak. I?d like to add maybe the well-known concept of baseline. If baseline is 275W in and 0(or very close to it)W out, then one bare Watt out is already a huge achievement. What?s the baseline here? I must have missed it...
And then it appears out of nowhere a quick jump to the conclusion: Lenz law is bent (I always laugh because of this verb; a law can not be bent by definition in its entire area of applicability. It?s either valid or not. And if it?s not valid, it ceases to exist as a law. So a law is always valid. At best the area of its applicability can be reduced: i.e. classical mechanics versus relativity, ohm in DC versus AC). Well?! I can accept (although rigorous data and proof are needed) that Lenz law is, in the best scenario and most excited interpretation given to the actual experiments, ?bent? at around zero efficiency. But who cares? Who?s gonna make use of it? We are at >90% efficiencies already.

Tinu

I never had the chance to express my appreciation for your excellent hard and high-quality work. I sincerely and respectfully do it now. I?m familiar with your well written web pages (and associated experiments) since November and although I didn?t have time to work on the subject, following your recent clear statement that the system is not OU, I tend to believe it?s an issue of impedance matching.

Yes, aether22, it looks like we agree on the first part - I have reached the same conclusion. This device puts a load on the motor

As it is designed to for the Demo.
It need not put any load on the motor either at all or that it does not output in electrical form if designed without various losses currently in place deliberately.

and that load can then be altered by means of feedback into the motor  from the back-emf in its associated coils.

No, the back-emf going into the motor does not decrease the mechanical load the generator puts on the motor, it does reduce the electrical load though.

However, this does not seem to be an improvement to the motor - would it not be better to remove that load altogether

In it's current form yes, if you are interested in something ready to manufacture without any research look elsewhere, what this device proves is however most extraordinarily important.

, since it is only producing waste heat and is not providing any useful work? It's analogous to adding a brake to the system - a brake acts as a mechanical load, producing waste heat, and when you ease off on it

Only the waste in the generator is not reduced, the mechanical load on it stays constant.
The waste in the motor is reduced and that is useful, and it may even be over unity. (though you would need to count the heating output in it's current form)

Seriously, you and various others saying much the same thing really seem to have a problem understanding anything but the most simple and most unsubtle issues.