A possible violation of the Law of Conservation of Energy

[sm0ky2]

No, a normal pendulum never goes past its dropped point.  But this one does. so given
the law of conservation of energy where did the energy come from to make it go
2 extra hours past the dropped point? very simple question.
It demonstrates to me that there is something beyond the law of conservaton of energy.

Norman

The pendulum travels 2 hours past its drop point, then drops from there to where?? slightly below the point it was dropped from?
If this were a true violation, the pendulum would swing higher and higher and eventually make a complete circle.

The magnetism alters the potential of gravity during that part of the swing. i.e. the force of gravity is not acting as much to pull the pendulum back down. There is also a magnetic potential which is behaving in a similar manner.
Thus the pendulum does not actually "gain" any energy.

NOW: if you were to lock the pendulum at this new height, and move the magnets to the other side before releasing it again......hmm

[sm0ky2]

smOky2,


In my "casual" description of my argument against the Law of Conservation of Energy I may not have made it clear that the chemical heat packs are at rest.  When the "moving magnet" is demagnetized this is done so when is it near and moving past the chemical heat pack.

It takes some time to heat the magnet, as well as some time for the full disassociation of the magnetic domains within the material.

The changes in a magnetic field take time to cross that field.

"... if a giant, huge, powerful magnet appeared one light year away out of nowhere, then it would take exactly one year for magnets on Earth to feel its pull (however small it may be). That is, it would take one year for the "magnetic force" to reach the Earth."

"... light is a propagation of electric and magnetic fields. So, if magnetic fields propagated faster than the speed of light, then light would also move faster than the speed of light. That is to say, they don't."

a magnetic field propagates instantaneously. It is the effects of this field which propagate at the speed of light. i.e. our ability to physically detect the change in flux occur.
If we had a magnetic field, lets say 2 light years across. And we demagnetized or turned off the EMF coil, etc.
The field would begin to collapse at a point 1 light year from the source in every direction. From the outer extremities towards the center of magnetism.






The magnetic field of a photon is spherical, and considerably larger than the photon itself.
Consider a photon at the moment it leaves an electron. The field is already ahead of it. The field arrives before the photon impacts its' target. If the field did not propagate faster than c, it would not be spherical, and it would never be ahead in the path of travel.
Rather, the field would train behind the photon. Which, simply is not the case.

There are ways this has been proven. My favorite example is in Ed Leedskalnins book : Magnetic Currents
Where in, he sets up a demonstration to send electricity through the air.
   This was proven to propagate the magnetic field of an electrical signal, faster than the signal itself. Thus enabling electrons to ride on their own magnetic wave, the same way a photon does.

[ayeaye]

Norman, how does your device really work? You should draw a diagram, for there to be anything to talk about.

Is it just a chain, where every next magnet is further from the center (if it works with attraction, or closer to the center when it works with repulsion)? Such chains are known, and they work because of potential energy as Zetetic said, no overunity.

My field lines chain is different, in that it works based on the asymmetry of the magnetic field, as i have explained. And the experiments show that as well, the additional energy gained there cannot be because of the potential energy, because no further magnets in the chain provide any additional energy potential. All magnets in the chain are the same strength, the same distance away from the center of the disc. The stator magnet every time goes through the magnetic field of every rotor magnet N S, and the N S are equal. The magnetic field is symmetric in that sense, it is asymmetric at every pole.

The only potential energy is the repulsion of the first pole of the first magnet. In the end the stator magnet does not remain locked by any magnet in the chain, but it stops at the position where it is not attracted or repulsed by any magnet (none is greater than friction). Different from the attraction chains based on potential energy, which in the end remain locked. Then it only needs to be given a potential energy of repulsion of the first magnet, to go through the chain again. And it evidently gets more energy by that, than that potential energy.

I have seen a very complex mechanical and magnetic device which was shown to rotate continuously. This may not be a hoax, it might be possible when using the asymmetry of the magnetic field properly, but such device would not be simple because of going through the magnetic field by a proper trajectory. And i think other overunity magnetic devices likely work because of asymmetry of the magnetic field as well, in a way or another.

I say my assumption is this. Given a chain of magnets, each of which is towards the stator magnet with the opposite pole (attracting), and every next magnet is closer to the edge of the disc. The total energy given by such chain is equal to the energy given by the attraction of the last magnet (closest to the stator magnet). Because the energy which any of these magnets give by their positive attraction, they take away by their negative attraction. Because the magnetic field of their poles is completely symmetric.

Now if anyone could show by experiment that the energy which such chain gives is greater than the energy given by the attraction of the last magnet, then this would mean overunity. Unfortunately though the experimenters never measure the energies properly, so this question cannot be answered. When working with repulsion, it's the same, just opposite. If anyone would show experimentally that such "potential energy chain" actually provides more energy than is necessary from releasing it from the lock, then that would be great of course. But so far it should be assumed that it does not.

And when it does, then i see no theoretical reason why that happens, because the fields of the magnets are used in a symmetric way. Then one should also provide a theoretical explanation. Norman mentioned "spin", is that some additional asymmetry of the magnetic field? I'm not aware of that, and it only makes sense to explain it theoretically when any experiment shows that there is any overunity because of that. And knowingly there are no such experiments so far, unless Norman shows that his experiment indeed provides any overunity.

To say all that briefly, i don't think that going through symmetric magnetic fields of no matter how many magnets with no matter what strength, can provide any additional energy. And there is knowingly no experiment which shows that this happens. Unless someone can show otherwise, and show that there is a "spin" or another additional asymmetry of the magnetic field, which makes that possible.

There should be a proper theoretical framework, for all that work to be any research, and anyhow useful. The theoretical base which i propose for permanent magnet devices, is asymmetry of the magnetic field.

[sm0ky2]

@AyeAye,

There are a few ways this can be set up, but they will all behave in a similar manner. (few exceptions noted)

Basically, the magnetic assist is a linear magnetic gate. the moving magnet enters the field and is pushed/pulled through the array.

if there is a repulsion boundary, momentum carries the moving magnet through the barrier into the gate.

if it is strictly attraction, momentum carries the moving magnet out past the attractive barrier at the end of the gate.

Gravity is countered both by momentum and magnetism in the upwards direction.

Magnetism is countered by momentum and gravity back down through the gate.

in a perfectly symmetrical gate (which is difficult to build, by the way) the gate will actually assist in both directions,
giving acceleration on the way back down as well.

in either case, the effects on the gravitational force are symmetrical in both directions. what you gain on the way up is what you get back out on the way down.
Thus leaving you with exactly what you started with.

The gain in height on one side is only "apparent".
It is possible to place gates on both sides of the pendulum, assuming the magnet doesn't 'hang' at the starting point.
and the pendulum can swing higher on both ends, thus appearing to oscillate with a greater swing distance than a regular pendulum. Understand that gravity is NOT E=mgh during this part of the swing.
The proper analysis will be  E = m(g-T)h Where T is the force imparted by the magnetism. This is not exactly precise, as gravity has a time constraint, where-as the magnetic force does not, so in actuality its a more complex equation.

Before the pendulum reaches position 3, where it would normally stop, it is under the influence of the magnetic gate array.
the magnets "assist" against gravity, lifting it to position 4.
whether it is set up in repulsion, or attraction, doesn't make a great deal of difference in this scenario. The end-result will be about the same.

[ayeaye]

Oh i see, then in Norman's experiment it's just a "magnetic gate array", as sm0ky2 called it, likely an attraction array, because it has no kinetic energy in the position 3. And in the position 4 it will then be locked. Just as i thought, but i called such magnet chain before a "potential energy chain". As i said, such magnetic gate array, no matter whether attractive or repulsive, should not provide any overunity, because the magnetic fields of the poles of the magnets there are symmetric.

Unless someone shows experimentally for example that the energy gained in the attraction chain (attraction gate) is anyhow greater than the energy provided by the attraction of the last magnet in the chain. And that there is some "spin" or whatever in the magnetic field, which makes that possible. Which no one knowingly has done yet.

As i have said, my field lines chain is completely different from the magnetic gate array. There the stator (rotor) magnet is towards the chain magnets by one pole, the same as in the magnetic gate array. But the magnets in the chain don't face the stator (rotor) magnet by pole, the chain is instead as follows, and all magnets are at the same distance from the edge (of the disc):
           
          | N | --->
          ===
[N S]   [N S]   [N S]   [N S]   [N S]   [N S]   [N S]   [N S]

I think potential energy is not real energy. It is a potential to get energy in some field. Yes the field does work. If we have a large magnet, and we let an iron ball to fall on it, then we get energy, first as a kinetic energy, which is then transformed into heat. And if we have a large number of such iron balls, then we can get a lot of energy. But when we want to get any of the balls back from there, then we have to use as much energy as we got, when the ball fell to the magnet.

So one may call it overunity, less energy in than we get out, indeed. But in overunity we have to consider the potential energy, otherwise overunity just doesn't make sense. Because the only reason we need overunity, is for continuous work. Otherwise one can do an experiment, let an object to drop from one's hand, and say overunity. No need for other experiments then, overunity is proven. This is the trick used in some overunity experiments, they say overunity, but they define overunity wrongly, so there really is no overunity.

So the overunity is defined like that, considering the potential energy. Because of its purpose, to repeatedly get energy. We don't need a continuous work in the experiments though, and its better when the device doesn't work continuously. Because it is likely impossible to measure the energies then. But we have to show by measurements, that there is overunity the way the overunity is defined.

No one is interested in any benefit of getting energy though, the only purpose of overunity experiments is theory. Using anything practically is primitive, the higher benefit is the theoretical thinking, and the creativity involved in that. I explain. We put all our efforts to do the theoretical work. We get no money for that, and we let others to take from us money. So we are in agony and we die in agony. And we get joy out of that agony.

That iron ball, we need the same energy to get it out from the magnet, than we got when it fell to the magnet, because the field is symmetric. It is not because of the mystery of potential energy. In the symmetric field, when moving something to somewhere, moving something back from there, takes the same amount of energy as we got when moving the thing to there. No matter by what trajectory we moved the thing, in one direction or the other. The same is not always true in an asymmetric field.

So in a symmetric field, the field can do work, every field can do work. But symmetric field cannot do continuous work. Thus for overunity we need an asymmetric field, so that the energy we get is greater than the initial potential energy in the field.