Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[lost_bro]

Mark.E
A laser beam.  Once again you fail.

   MarkE: Please direct me to where you got the idea that a laser beam has voltage and no electrons.
Or can you prove that this is so. Can you provide proof of an electron, or the lack of them? Empirical proof.
  I thought that light was composed of photons, not electrons, or voltage. Little did I know.
  Does Sun light have voltage too, and no electrons, as well.
  How can you be sure? Who can we trust,  NASA perhaps??? Your old school teacher, maybe.
   Most everything that NASA has done and said, has been lies. 

   There are no OU prizes being awarded.  Must mean that there are no self running devices, either.
  Kapanadze, Akula, Ruslan, Stepanov, Sr 193, Vasmus, etz... All a bunch of fakes. Right?
I've never seen a self runner. Have you?  They must not exist then, or someone would have won the prize.
  Same thing with ghosts,and spirits,  just peoples imagination. No proof. Just BS. 
  Telepathy, no not that as well. No proof.
   Can you Mark, prove to me that what we call "SunLight" comes from the Sun? 
Really, how?

Good day NickZ

You forgot the N.D.E.,, Near Death Experience..............

take care , peace
lost_bro

[gotoluc]

Maybe my past experiments can help here.

I had found in my mostly magnet motor design that I could increase an electromagnet pull force by adding PM.

I started with a small model that could pull 250 grams on the scale with a power input of 1/2 a watt. So I built a bigger model and could pull 500 grams with the same 1/2 watt input. So then I built a super model that could pull 2,500 grams with the same 1/2 watt input power.

Do we remember what we learned from this?

Luc

What was not apparent at the beginning and became very apparent with the super build is, as we increase the surface area and size of the permanent magnets the electromagnet coil was moving much much slower then the first build.

Sure the pull force (torque) was much more (10x) in the super build with the same 1/2 watt input but the time it took to move say a 1 inch distance took 10 times more time then the first model did.
So which one is better?

Luc

[picowatt]

This is where everything that is really simple,gets turned into something that is unnecessarily complicated.
All you need is a known weight,a capacitor of know value,and a set voltage-nothing more other than the rest of the mechanical setup.
You guys make things so complicated,when in fact,there quite simple test to carry out.

What you state sounds quite intuitive.  However, I do not believe I am over complicating anything.

We seem to agree that it is only during the period of change that work is being performed.

How does "rate of change" enter into everything?         

Do we not need to measure all variables with regard to time/rate?

PW 

[gotoluc]

What was not apparent at the beginning and became very apparent with the super build is, as we increase the surface area and size of the permanent magnets the electromagnet coil was moving much much slower then the first build.

Sure the pull force (torque) was much more (10x) in the super build with the same 1/2 watt input but the time it took to move say a 1 inch distance took 10 times more time then the first model did.
So which one is better?

Luc

What I learned and well from those experiments is, if we have an electromagnet moving in a magnetic field no matter how powerful the PM field is, the counter force the electromagnet experiences is the limiting factor and is why electric motors do not get any more efficient then 95%

If there is a way to reduce this limitation by bucking fields and or shorting coils at a certain time, then this is worth experimenting and why I am here.

Luc

[verpies]

We all agree that it takes energy to create a magnetic field<--right?

Right

So with this being understood, i can give good reason as to how and why a PM can do useful work in regards to my experiment.

That will be determined by the experiment and  I am not even there yet.
At this stage I am trying to narrow down how the electric energy is going to be measured in it.
I accept that the extension of the spring is a good measure of the mechanical output energy.
I balk at the notion of the final current being an indicator of input energy.

1A flowing through a coil can mean 1mJ or 10J of stored magnetic energy, depending on coil's inductance ( E=
½Li² ).

Before you counter that the coil is the same and has the same inductance, notice that it is not true between the two runs of your experiment, because the inductance of the coil is strongly affected by materials of high permeability in its vicinity and in the first run you have a block of highly permeable material and in the second one you have a permanent magnet whose permeability is close to that of air.

In order for the electromagnet to be attracted, a temporary field of opposite poles must be built around that ferrite keeper. As we know,to build or produce a magnetic field takes energy,and in this case,the energy is supplied by the electrical energy flowing into the coil to build that field around the ferrite keeper.

Yes, but we cannot measure this energy by the current alone.

When we change that ferrite keeper out for the PM, no energy is required to build that second field, as it already exists -->that second field is already built.
So no energy is needed to temporarily align the magnetic domains within the keeper to create that temporary magnetic field,as it already exist with the PM.

Yes, and that is why it takes less energy to achieve the same current level flowing in the coil. compared to the case with soft ferrite.

"PM" ... reduces the needed energy required to create that second magnetic field.

Yes, that was my point all along.  It takes less electric energy to build up the current in the coil to e.g. 1A with the permanent magnet than worth a soft ferrite. You just cannot measure this energy by this 1A current level alone.

Correct this input electric energy measurement method in your experiment and we can proceed further.