The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

[T-1000]

Now back to the subject at hand:
How would you phrase the Lenz's law quantiatively?

"For every action there is opposite reaction" which means same strength magnetic field is induced in coil to oppose flux change. This is cause of cogging.
1) If the magnet is moving this reflects against movement.
2) If the coil and magnet are stationary the resulting kinetic force will remain mostly between these two ends. The kinetic force which will cause magnetic switching in coil will remain unaffected when its vector is on 90 degrees. This is what I am asking to test in lab.

[Just..Sayin..]

For those who are interested I looked through the comments from the other Indonesian inventor who posted his video two years ago and then vanished into thin air, something like Syairchairun....

Here are some of the things he had to say...

URL of his mogen, it is the orange one I linked to in an earlier post... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-Ea8xVt0yk



Sorry, I do not feel as inventor. Maybe there are more ahead of me and probably better. Here I will just hold experiment. I just assemble and combine several existing components.

Q Generators have you modifisikasi be permanent magnets?
A AVR generator must be modified slightly. If necessary, given the generator output voltage remains stable stavolt that will keep the electric motor rotation. To exchange information, please contact to my email usweentop@gmail.com

Thank you for the correction. Free in question is free from pollution. Free from fossil fuel dependency

Sorry, this experiment still many shortcomings. And we continue to find the best solution. To exchange information, please contact to my email. usweentop@gmail.com

I have not tried. For a while, my focus into AC current circulation. Load power that is used must not be greater than or equal to the power produced by the generator. The output power must be limited. That's the point of MCB. Congratulations to you who already tries to lighting in your area. success always (Reminds me of Syairchairun running the welder and maxing his generator out, probably why the belt and sound anomaly occured)

True. The basic theory like that. The tricky part is that you have to modify the AVR generator and seek appropriate comparison poly

AVR generator must be modified to maintain the stability of the output. only the

The generators and electric motors has been modified to be permanent magnets. Time delay Provides sufficient time for stability of voltage and frequency


1) AC Generator 220 V, 5000 kVA, 1500 rpm. 2)Electric Motor 220 V, 1200 watt, 1 HP, 2850 rpm. 3) Timer Delay. 4) Magnetic Contactor. SALAM

Q Hello unsweentop, very good work. I guess that the 1500rpm generator is 4-pole, but the 2850rpm motor is 2-pole. Is that right? Thanks.
A Yes, you right. But there is was modificated to be permanent magnet

(Question)   Box on top of the orange electric motor is clearly not part of the original motor and is large enough to house a batter to power the device. Why do these people never show schematics and demonstrate that no fraud is evident? What are they hiding?
(Answer) No, I'm not hide anything. I just waiting for right time and right place to share my experiment for right man.

[Cadman]

This is what I am building right now.

Cheers

[Just..Sayin..]

This is what I am building right now.

Cheers

Looking forward to your reports...

[NoBull]

"For every action there is opposite reaction" which means same strength magnetic field is induced in coil to oppose flux change. This is cause of cogging.
1) If the magnet is moving this reflects against movement.
2) If the coil and magnet are stationary the resulting kinetic force will remain mostly between these two ends. The kinetic force which will cause magnetic switching in coil will remain unaffected when its vector is on 90 degrees. This is what I am asking to test in lab.

I agree that the Lenz's law is similar to the Newton's 3^rd law:
"^{Every action is attended by an equal and opposite reaction}"

The word "equal" makes it more of a quantitative statement.

However, I think that it is too much of a change from what's written at Wikipedia now.
The original statement relates change of magnetic flux to induced emf and current and I'd like to keep the reference to these 3 players in this statement. Also I do not want to pollute this statement with secondary concepts such as motion of flux sources and forces.

The Faraday's law of induction makes a quantitative statement about the sign and magnitude of the EMF relative to the time rate of flux change (dΦ/dt) but it makes no statement about the magnitude of the induced current.

^{"The induced electromotive force in any closed circuit is equal to the negative of the time rate of change of the magnetic flux enclosed by the circuit."}

Usually the current can be calculated from Ohm's Law I=EMF/R but that law is useless in an ideal coil (e.g. SC current loop) because in such coils R=0.

For completeness, we need a quantitative statement that directly relates the magnitude of induced current to the change of magnetic flux (ΔΦ) such as in my experiment.