Self accelerating reed switch magnet spinner.

[conradelektro]

@Conradelektro,

The plate you're referring to is the stack of iron laminations with a coil wrapped around it that vibrates over the horseshoe magnet right? The Bloch wall comes up from the center of the horseshoe magnet and mushrooms out into a shell. The diametric rotor has the same Bloch wall mushroom shell as the horseshoe magnet. There's a good schematic of this on Morpher44's video introductions, I can't find a way to copy it over.


Spinning the horseshoe magnet would not influence the position of the Bloch wall or mushrooming neutral zone. There's no attraction or repulsion inside the neutral zone. Spinning the horseshoe magnet with the iron keeper inside the neutral zone would have no effect on either the magnet or the keeper; However, if it wobbled a little bit, it would have the same effect on the keeper as vibrating the keeper in and out of the zone to reverse the domain polarity while stationary. The saturation effect on the iron eventually kills the reversal effect and makes this model extremely inefficient. Using the advanced neo magnets over the soft iron keeper laminations is thousands of times more powerful. Our test setup is basically identical to Wesley Gary's original patent, except we're wrapping around a stack of magnets and vibrating the field instead of wrapping around a stack of iron laminations and reversing the atomic domain. Every diametric magnet rotor is just eccentric enough to oscillate the zone due to the low tolerance's of the magnet manufacturers.


After you're finished wrapping the magnet coil and confirming the OU>1 COP with your sophisticated scientific measuring instruments, I believe we'll attract other experimenters from the group and together be able move forward and perfect the generator. This work of yours is an extremely important step, because I don't have the laboratory equipment to adequately confirm my claims.

Yes, but why did you have the idea of spinning a magnet and putting a stack of magnets (inside a coil) near the spinnig magnet? Why is that similar to Gary's idea?

1) On the one hand we have Gary: horse shoe magnet and  the stack of iron laminations with a coil wrapped around it that vibrates over the horseshoe magnet.

2) On the other hand we have synchro1: a spinning magnet and a tube magnet (inside a coil) near the spinning magnet.

Why is 1) similar to 2)? I do not understand how one comes from 1) to 2)? What are your arguments for that? What is the common principle in 1) and 2) according to your opinion?

2) (synchro1's  idea) is much easier to build than 1) (Gary's idea), but why can 1) be replaced by 2) without loosing the underlying principle?

The most significant difference I see is that Gary uses just one stationary magnet (a horse shoe magnet) and synchro1 uses at least two magnets (a spinning magnet and a tube magnet inside the generator coil)? There is nothing spinning in the Gary setup (only the plate vibrates), but there is something spinning in the synchro1 setup (the spinning magnet) and the second magnet (plus coil) should vibrate?

I am not criticising, just trying to understand the technical arguments leading from Gary to synchro1? May be I am too much thinking about theory? Let's say Gary's setup realy works. Why should synchro1's setup work, it is different? One can of course turn the reasoning around, why should Gary's set up work, if synchro1's setup is good? For me the two ideas are mutually exclusive?

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: I see, the middle paragraph in your previsous answer seems to answer my silly questions.

[synchro1]

I got the results first by accident as I explained when my Cook battery fell into my diametric bearingless spinner. I extrapolated the theory afterwards to help explain the non-understood experimental effects. All that matters is that it works; And if it works, don't fix it!


The diametric rotor has a neutral zone between the poles, just like a horseshoe magnet. Only a dipole magnet can produce a neutral zone, either diametric tube, cylinder, axial disk, bar or horseshoe. This is known as the "Bloch Wall". There's a spatial area where there's no attraction either way. It doesn't matter if it's spinning or standing still, the zone of no force is still in the same relative position. It balloons out, and instead of in adjacency, it turns into a shell, with one pole to the outside of the other, instead of side by side.


Here's a good video demonstrating the magnetic lines of force with a horseshoe and axial magnet. Take a good look at the compass directions from the horseshoe field on the outside. Freeze the video at 0:32 and look at the orientation of the compass needle on the extreme left side. It's horizontal! Think about that. One side of the needle is south polarity and the other north. Completely opposite fields one OUTSIDE the other, but just by a very small area of calibration! This is exactly where we want to position the end of the magnet core. Imagine that area spinning around. The overall net effect on the spinning rotor factors out to zero in this flutter zone, because it's on average either having no effect, perfectly balanced in the neutral zone, or half the time on one side and half the time on the other. Meanwhile abundant power's generated in the magnet core coil wraps from the fluctuating field with no Lenz drag whatsoever on the prime mover! Conradelektro has demonstrated that it's really not that difficult to locate the zone. It's all gravy from that point on!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdomJQvxPZE

[conradelektro]

@synchro1: thank you for taking the time to explain your theory, I am catching on.

I also appreciate that you write freely about your theory. Lesser minds would make a big secret out of it (patent, I have OU, you know what we see in this forum all the time).

It is worth wile to give it a try, your arguments are well put. One never knows what comes out of a theory, but why not strain ones mind.

I can report a little progress, see the attached photo. May be tomorrow the first "synchro coil" is ready for winding. Writing in a forum is easy, building something takes hours and hours.

Greetings, Conrad

[conradelektro]

Attached please see the circuit for the first measurements I intend to do with the synchro coil near my vertical magnet spinner. It will be held by hand (resting on the base plate of the spinner).

The intention is to get a first indication of its output power.

Is the 10µF capacitor too high if one expects a few mA?

Greetings, Conrad

[synchro1]

@Conradelektro,


                        Too big a coil face will create Lenz drag. You won't want too many wraps thick. Keep in mind where the power's coming from. Skycollection uses those big pancakes with the ferrite electromagnetic toroid cores. He only partially minimizes his Lenz drag as a consequence. I wouldn't raise the face more the 1/2", which would make 1" total for drag face. 1/4" might even be better. Thin wire will yield lots of turns due to the length of the coil, so thickness is less of a priority. A 3/8" thick radius would probably be plenty depending on wire gauge. Plenty of turns due to coil length and wire thinness is going to raise the output voltage pretty high, so I wouldn't recommend over winding. The form looks perfect. Very nice work.


                         Milehigh had allot to say to me about the non-difference between a single wire wrap coil and the Tesla series wrap bifilar. The Tesla series wrap bifilar offers "zero resistance to changes in current direction", unlike the single wire wrap coil, makeing it superior as an A.C. output coil. A monopole rotor would not make a difference, but due to the oscillatory nature of the dipole, the Tesla bifilar is a far superior choice.