Work from 2 magnets > 19% output 2

[Floor]

@lumen
No apologies necessary , but rather, let me thank you  for the well reasoned and positive input.
Were on the same page.
                     Cheers
                    Floor

[conradelektro]

@Floor

Your new machine is a very nice contraption and the experiment is very interesting. I find it interesting because it demonstrates a measuring problem:

- one needs two different mechanisms, one to push a magnet and a second to turn a magnet

- the two mechanisms have to be different (one pushes and the second turns)

- therefore the two mechanisms will have two different friction losses

- in addition the friction losses will not be the same over the operating range (more relative friction loss for small weights and less relative friction losses for heavier weights)

I can find no easy way to separate the friction losses from the measurement.

I come to the conclusion that the about 20% difference means that the overall friction loss in one mechanisms is about 20% less (ore more) than in the other mechanism.

So, you are measuring the difference in friction and not the difference in magnetic force. In  theory the magnet force should be the same (if you use similar magnets) and the friction in two different mechanism should be different. And your observation seems to show exactly that. And also, sliding seems to have more friction loss than turning, which is logical.

To make progress with your contraption one has to find a way to "separate" the friction losses from the magnetic force measurement. And unfortunately I have no idea how to do that.

I like to make a prediction: if one uses very big magnets and very heavy weights (several kilos) the difference in friction losses will be smaller (in case the machine is mechanically well built) because the friction losses will be smaller in comparison to the magnet force involved.

As in all OU machines, measurement is the challenge.

Greetings, Conrad

[lumen]

@Floor

Your new machine is a very nice contraption and the experiment is very interesting. I find it interesting because it demonstrates a measuring problem:

- one needs two different mechanisms, one to push a magnet and a second to turn a magnet

- the two mechanisms have to be different (one pushes and the second turns)

- therefore the two mechanisms will have two different friction losses

- in addition the friction losses will not be the same over the operating range (more relative friction loss for small weights and less relative friction losses for heavier weights)

I can find no easy way to separate the friction losses from the measurement.

I come to the conclusion that the about 20% difference means that the overall friction loss in one mechanisms is about 20% less (ore more) than in the other mechanism.

So, you are measuring the difference in friction and not the difference in magnetic force. In  theory the magnet force should be the same (if you use similar magnets) and the friction in two different mechanism should be different. And your observation seems to show exactly that. And also, sliding seems to have more friction loss than turning, which is logical.

To make progress with your contraption one has to find a way to "separate" the friction losses from the magnetic force measurement. And unfortunately I have no idea how to do that.

I like to make a prediction: if one uses very big magnets and very heavy weights (several kilos) the difference in friction losses will be smaller (in case the machine is mechanically well built) because the friction losses will be smaller in comparison to the magnet force involved.

As in all OU machines, measurement is the challenge.

Greetings, Conrad

@Conrad

The device was vibrated to remove as much friction as possible at each point so I believe it's worth further investigation.
I have done many magnetic force interaction tests and always found the total results to be very close meaning there is no OU.

I use CNC machines to hold and move the magnets and the results are measured with a digital scale.
Because the magnet under test is attached to a digital scale and never actually moves any friction is reduced to near zero.

At some point I will be testing the interaction of Floor's claim but even a negative on my testing does not invalidate the claim because the actual reason for the difference may not have been tested in my test.  It may not be as simple as the path the magnets travel.

[conradelektro]

I use CNC machines to hold and move the magnets and the results are measured with a digital scale.
Because the magnet under test is attached to a digital scale and never actually moves any friction is reduced to near zero.

Clever idea to fix the magnet to a digital scale! I also like the very precise positioning with a CNC machine.

At some point I will be testing the interaction of Floor's claim but even a negative on my testing does not invalidate the claim because the actual reason for the difference may not have been tested in my test.  It may not be as simple as the path the magnets travel.

It is a well known fact, that negative proof is not possible (because one could have overlooked some essential parameter). So lets hope you find a difference in some two paths which you are able to test.

But I think that what we know about electromagnetism rules that out.

1) There could be a difference going down to the level of particles (sub-atomic size) or in the very large (cosmological scale). Both areas are not easy to access.

2) It could also be, that moving magnets at a very high frequency (beyond Terra-Hertz) causes some strange relativistic effect (moving two magnets near the speed of light relative to each other). But this is almost impossible to do.

3) And finally, cooling a magnet down to absolute zero ( -272 C°) could make it behave strangely. Which would need a very good refrigerator.

All areas not thoroughly examined yet (since the 19th century) are not open to the home experimenter.

A pet science thing of mine is "mechanical resonance" (not "electromagnetic resonance in an oscillator"). In the 19th century they did a lot of things with crystals and resonance (but it was mostly esoterica).

Most musical instruments exhibit nice mechanical resonance effects. If you tune a musical instrument to a resonance frequency of a wine glass, you can make the wine glass sing along (very muted at a certain note). Tuning the wine glass by partly filling it with water is not very effective, because the water damps the vibration of the glass.

Mechanical resonance will probably not show OU but could be an effective way to heat something or to move something (conveyors or pumps).

Greetings, Conrad

[lumen]

Just to show how much the shape of the magnet can affect it's character I uploaded this short video.

https://youtu.be/ZoDg6hVHttU

With the attraction shown, one might think that some of the work may not be equal in all cases.