Lenz free generator

[Magluvin]

Thus, stopping the reflective effects of Lenz's Law from the Secondary back on to the Primary!!! Here is an example of this!!!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Ok. With that in mind......

Wouldnt that be the same difference as inputting a constant sine wave vs a simple boost circuit?

Like if in the boost circuit we pulse the primary in a polarity that the single rectifier off the secondary does not conduct until the primary current is cut and the collapse induces the secondary and in the direction of the rectifier to the output. Is that not Lenz less?

Mags

[Magluvin]

Mags - Excellent! Not Cocky at all!

A Counter Balanced Weight, see image below, or put better, maximum MMF is Reflected on a Primary Coil, by the Secondary, when there is a 180 Degree Phase Shift. To Counter this 180 Degree Phase Shift means our Input is minimised. We need to keep this going and thus a small amount of Input will be needed. We also want to maximise our Output, so a Counter MMF is needed.

For a Small Force at the Pivot Point (Our Input) allows a Large Force on the Load (Our Output) and the Counter Weight (Counter-Reaction) is the self Induced Force, equal and opposite to the Load (Our Output) - I hope this makes sense?

This is Newton's Law's of Motion, with one added: Action, Reaction and Counter-Reaction

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

I can understand that the input is minimized. But referring to my last post, say the boost circuit is setup so the pulse into the primary induces the secondary during the pulse, there would be an increased input in doing so vs the secondary only being induced by the field collapse after the primary is turned off, depending on the polarity of the output rectifier/output setup.

So Im not seeing the advantage, yet.

Mags

[EMJunkie]

Ok. With that in mind......

Wouldnt that be the same difference as inputting a constant sine wave vs a simple boost circuit?

Like if in the boost circuit we pulse the primary in a polarity that the single rectifier off the secondary does not conduct until the primary current is cut and the collapse induces the secondary and in the direction of the rectifier to the output. Is that not Lenz less?

Mags

Electromagnetic Induction is the Pumping of Electrical Energy, Energy over Time, or Watt Seconds. Lenz's Law is the direction of this Energy, equal and opposite.

This is Mass Energy Equivalence, where the Mass, Copper in our case, is the Source of Energy / C² (The Speed of Light Squared)

Mass = Energy / The Speed of Light²

Electromagnetic Induction, the Direction of it, Lenz's Law, is always ±180 Degrees out of Phase.

By incorporating into Systems, phenomena where Electromagnetic Induction is invoked many times more than once, is of benefit. Each Energy Source, the Mass being Pumped, can be utilised in its own right.

There are many ways, but each source of Induction must be incorporated to assist the other in a sequence the same as mentioned.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[EMJunkie]

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. For a moment, think basic AC Transformer, Input is Output less losses. Lenz's Law applies. Efficiency is 90+ %... Also, one needs to think of Energy Output, not Energy Input. These are opposite so if you think Input, reverse the idea and then its Output.

The Primary Invokes Induction in the Secondary. The MMF, Magnetising Force at a single point in time is equal to the MMF, Magnetising Force of the Secondary, Reflected back on Primary, this being a Destructive Interference, ±180 Degrees out of Phase Magnetically, but Constructive Interference Wave Electrically.

Thus the Input Current must Increase to keep over coming this reflective MMF. This is the BH Curve.

See the below Image:

We need to make geometrically, or systematically, via Switching, changes, to allow this 1:1 less losses, Energy exchange, more efficient.

Imagine for a minute a 5KG weight, we need to lift it 1 Foot. What's the most efficient way to do this?

Counter Balance this Weight!!! See Below Image:

If we have two Magnetic Fields, the Force of Each Counter balancing each other in the same way, we will see one Field assist our Input and one oppose our Input.

Permanent Magnets are of benefit to these systems because of this Counter Balancing.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[i_ron]

OK, getting back to the mag base switcher, ready?  it is happening over on another forum

Hi guys, I will be back in about three or four hours to answer any questions and reply to comments, But in the mean time I wanted to mention something. The switcher is a product of 5 people's work, Myself, Mark, Nicolas, Lawrence and Bruno. It's being referred to as the LaFonte Switcher but it is really the LaFonte Group Switcher.[/size]I don't want all the credit to get attached to me. We work as a team and everyone has stuck with me through all the designs that did not work and I am very lucky to have such a great team. We don't know how many machines we built that might be overunity because we ran out of money before R&D could be completed. Mark has a storage trailer full of our prototypes. Maybe someday we will have the funds to complete the R&D on all of them. There are close to 2000 designs on paper. Maybe with the success of the switcher we can build them all.Back in several hours,Butch[quote/]


edit...up to page 5  and I see you are already there EM, LOL


http://overunity.com/8852/lafonte-group-can-turn-off-permanent-magnet-without-work/45/#.V8-AacsrJpQ
[size=78%]
[/size]