Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

Started by TheoriaApophasis, July 13, 2014, 04:20:12 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 14 Guests are viewing this topic.

picowatt

Quote from: TheoriaApophasis on July 22, 2014, 03:31:13 AM
Current is discharged thru the ENTIRE F-ing magnet, which creates, resultantly this magneto-dielectric structure:


Are you saying that in the images of the magnetizer station you posted, you believe that electrical current is passed between the two large iron pole pieces directly thru the magnet being magnetized?

PW

TheoriaApophasis

Quote from: picowatt on July 22, 2014, 03:36:36 AM
Are you saying that in the images of the magnetizer station you posted, you believe that electrical current is passed between the two large iron pole pieces directly thru the magnet being magnetized?

PW


I suggest you look up the words  FIELD and INDUCTION again.     Seems they slipped your brain pan


You said---
>>>>>passed between the two large iron pole pieces<<<<<<<<<

Im telling you that depending on HOW YOU lay the magnet when its induced, you can polarized (for example) a horseshoe magnet END TO END, or  TOP TO BOTTOM (etc).



Oh hell, look wireless INDUCTION powering a light bulb!!!  how "new"   (wait, no its not).


Please wise the hell up,  no offense.




That charge dumps from the banks to the coil  INTO THE "MAGNETS", son,  is what causes the dis-equilibrium and creates that Finger-Breaking  Neo-Magnet (that you have no clue how it works)


(and apparently how its created either).

picowatt

Quote from: TheoriaApophasis on July 22, 2014, 03:44:46 AM

I suggest you look up the words  FIELD and INDUCTION again.     Seems they slipped your brain pan



Oh hell, look wireless INDUCTION powering a light bulb!!!  how "new"   (wait, no its not).


Please wise the hell up,  no offense.

I suggest you learn how to answer questions instead of deflecting them.

In the magnetizer station depicted in the images you posted, do you believe that electrical current is passed between the two large pole pieces of the magnetizer directly through the magnet being magnetized?

it's a simple yes or no question.

PW

tinman

Quote from: MileHigh on July 22, 2014, 02:39:35 AM
PW:

I haven't looked at the new clip but I am really feeling what you are saying, it sounds perfect.  When only the tips of the magnet can conduct current into the water, you can visualize the current "blooming" out of each end of the magnet and the "blooming" will be in a very similar direction to the magnetic field.  Hence the magnitude of the cross-product between the current flow and the magnetic field is very low and hence you don't get much of a torque imparted at all on the electrolyte "spaghetti strands."  You are awesome!

Brad, I have to scold you.  For starters, I made a posting that stated that three conditions had to be met for the vortex in the water to get created.  Look at my three conditions and relate that to what PW says and what I say in the above paragraph.  The reason to "scold" you is that you did the experiment and your conclusion was that an electromagnet produces a "different" magnetic field than a magnet.  Yet over the past few years you have looked at countless diagrams of magnets and electromagnets where you see essentially an identical magnetic field pattern produced by both things.  You probably have taken a compass and moved it around a magnet and an electromagnet and observed the same magnetic field pattern.  So how could you even say what you were saying?  It's almost like a couple of years ago when you were a beginner taking your first baby steps and every second or third clip you made you might say that you were demonstrating "something new that that science and engineering does not understand."  Respect.

I stated in an earlier posting that with your experiment you only made an observation and you did not arrive at a conclusion.  Likewise, I think one of Theoria's pitches is that a magnet and an electromagnet are very much different, the "magnetic fields are different because the sources are different" (or something like that) and that is not true.  Both an electromagnet and a magnet make use of exactly the same fundamental mechanism to generate the magnetic field.

In a similar vein, your underwater spinner is being pitched by Theoria and something new, like it's a big deal.  The truth is, you can literally construct that experiment in your head.  You know two things ahead of time, (1) the water will normally spin in a vortex if the magnet is stationary because of the cross product between the magnetic field and the spaghetti tubes of current, and (2) the water is 'sticky' and it is 'stuck' on the surface of the magnet such that the vortex will work on pushing the water and it will also push on the body of the magnet.  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  You can crunch those two things in your head before you even do the experiment and conclude that the underwater spinner will indeed spin.  The underwater spinner experiment breaks no new ground at all.

Anyway, you learned something new, and that's the most important part.  But you have to be conservative and stop arriving at conclusions that go against what is already known and well understood.  Your coil vs. electromagnet experiment was simply a "casse tete" and nothing more than that.

MileHigh
MH-My comment was valid in the test i carried out. There was clearly no spin at the pole end of the electromagnet,and a clear spin with a PM. Of course this may not be the case with all electromagnet's,but it was the case with the DUT in my video.. The video clearly showed this. Maybe hold off until the next video is uploaded,and then we can discus things a little more.
Maybe i should have worded my comment more carfully-like ! this particular electromagnet dose not seem to create a spin or vortex effect like the PM dose.

picowatt

Quote from: tinman on July 22, 2014, 03:51:31 AM
MH-My comment was valid in the test i carried out. There was clearly no spin at the pole end of the electromagnet,and a clear spin with a PM. Of course this may not be the case with all electromagnet's,but it was the case with the DUT in my video.. The video clearly showed this. Maybe hold off until the next video is uploaded,and then we can discus things a little more.
Maybe i should have worded my comment more carfully-like ! this particular electromagnet dose not seem to create a spin or vortex effect like the PM dose.

Any spoilers available or must we wait for the new video?

When do you think it will be available?

PW