Magnets, motion and measurement

[lancaIV]

ayeaye,I will question you related "magnet : permanent and electro" and "force: positive and negative"

Where/what  is the difference by same dimension 1 inch x 1 inch x 1 inch permanent magnet

C5 ceramic magnet
C8 ceramic magnet

AlNiCo magnet
Samarium XY magnet
Neodymium XY magnet
( later Ferrit-Nitrite)
to give the measureable + or - force  ?  Source ?



When these forces are convertable to electromagnetic forces by F=BIL,attention with the conditionizing
and we know :

The permanent magnets "emitts" forces permanent, N-forces and S-forces

The electro-magnets ( by DC,AC or pulsed DC) "emitts" a.permanent b. periodically N-forces and/or S-forces

and 1 W( for unit Watt !) h DC is not 1 Wh AC ; 1 Wh DC/ 1 Wh pulsed DC ?
IMPORTANT ? W( for physical Work !)= Fs , yes !

in motion we have speed and velocity
with tangential velocity and angular velocity parallel

and the pm/em-forces combination advantage f.e. 70 units pm mmf  + 70 units emf ~ 280 units mmf( Flynn : magnetic actuator Hilden-Brand : magnetic valve)
and extra the emf on/off-switch = zero consume

and the resonant circuit gains

and the double rotor- one cw and the other ccw- on the same shaft principle

and do all this into a virtual protoype/model : soft

Is this experimental stage by your "Coulomb model" ?
With which Coulomb friction kinds and numbers do you work your statements out ?



When yes and you can measure output ≥ input you have overunity result and this means :by actual physical and technical standart commercial :


        NOTHING !
Your recognition worth is to compare with 1 Wp TV cell value : +- 10 cents
But this is NOT only you/the experimenter related,for all un-/professionals global up to I.S.S.-orbital

[ayeaye]

Is this experimental stage by your "Coulomb model" ?
With which Coulomb friction kinds and numbers do you work your statements out ?

No, difference from the Coulomb model for magnetic fields, asymmetry. The experiment and its replication did show gain of energy. In addiition there is vertical energy, not measured, can be utilized like electromechanically, like allow the stator magnet to move a bit, and put coil around it.

It shows that it is possible to get energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field, yes.

Nothing goes ahead with that though, as no one is no more willing to do any experiments, the reason is lack of motivation. But what there is, is enough to show a gain of energy.

[Floor]

@ Norman 6538

Thanks.

I have a request of you, (which I sometimes find, that I myself have not followed follow).

Often I find my self unable to grasp what you are showing.

Please be extremely diligent in explaining your drawings, vids, observations and so on. 

    PS
          Please dont blow up my persona into some kind of bigger than it really is thing.
          For example  floor 101 or so on.  I would appreciate this.  These topics are the result
          of the participation and cooperation of many and from many views and stances in life.

                    stay safe
                           floor
              keep up the good work

[Floor]

@ all readers

There exist a wide variety of ATTEMPTS at O.U. with magnets, through what is often refereed to
as asymmetry of the fields. You tube is full of them.

The classic example of this sort of device is called the "V gate" design.

Some V gate designs are rotary, others are linear. There are many variations. Some old, some
newer ones.

Nearly all of the "magnet motor" designs I have seen over the years are some variation of that idea.

Newtons laws of motion are valid and ever present in those designs. Those designs only continue
to move due some amount of momentum and then they stop.  No O.U. there.

The magnet interactions I have focused upon in this topic are of a fundamentally efferent methodology.   Newtons laws of motion are just as present in their operation as in any other
design.

However Newtons laws are to a large extent, the basis of the functioning of the magnetic force shunting / redirecting /shielding designs, although there is more to it / it's more complex than simply that.

IT THIS TOPIC the phrase "magnetic field" referrers only to that three dimensional region around
a magnet in which a magnetic force is measured. The topic does not fundamentally concern itself with field theory.

I have never seen / heard of a truly spherical field around a permanent magnet. The field is
toroid. Basically doughnut shaped. Long and thin if surrounding a long thin bar magnet.
Flattened out if surrounding a wafer magnet. Then there are ring magnets horse shoe magnets
and so on.  Magnetic fields as they are generally found in our world any thing but spherical.

Force from a permanent magnet does not diminish in accord with the inverse square law. NEVER !
The farther from a magnet the force measured is, the more it comes NEAR TO FALLING INTO inverse square law. But both the mathematics and the measurements say that it never actually reaches inverse square.  The force from a magnet is small and unusable way before, it is far enough away to be very near to indistinguishable from diminishing by the inverse of the square of the distance.

The Coulomb model is essentially the same as to say... science has labeled electrostatic charge as a plus and a minus charge and that opposites attract, likes repel.   O.U. with magnets, does not violate the Coulomb model, it is dependent upon it.

Symmetry is defined by a certain sameness.  For example... the left and  right halves of a vase may be
mirror images of one another.  But that same vase may not be symmetrical in terms of a comparison of is upper and lower halves.  The only three dimensional shape which is symmetrical from all 3D points
of view is the sphere. No permanent magnet field is symmetrical from all point of view.

The field of force around a permanent magnet is not a sphere.  But it is common to many magnet shapes that there is a symmetry present... from one or more view points.


On might as well drop discussion of the forces measured within a 3d field as being symmetrical or not, as this is not a cause of O.U. in itself.  It's not a case to argue either for or against. It's a WAST OF TIME in that context.

  peace out
      floor

[ayeaye]

@ all readers

There exist a wide variety of ATTEMPTS at O.U. with magnets, through what is often refereed to
as asymmetry of the fields. You tube is full of them.

The classic example of this sort of device is called the "V gate" design.

You already said that once. I explained and you ignore. Why do you try to make it look like that my experiment was V-gate? Why do you try to mislead people?

"Newtons laws of motion are valid and ever present in those designs. Those designs only continue
to move due some amount of momentum and then they stop.  No O.U. there.
"

Correct for V-gate and all its varieties. All setups don't exactly correspond to the Coulomb model, but the way how this design is assumed to work, assumes a Coulomb model.

"However Newtons laws are to a large extent, the basis of the functioning of the magnetic force shunting / redirecting /shielding designs, although there is more to it / it's more complex than simply that."

FALSE. This doesn't provide overunity. If all the design works only by the Newton laws, then there cannot be overunity no matter how many magnets, how they are positioned, or how they move or rotate.

"Force from a permanent magnet does not diminish in accord with the inverse square law. NEVER !
The farther from a magnet the force measured is, the more it comes NEAR TO FALLING INTO inverse square law."

Yes and this means that near the magnetic poles the Newton law and the Coulomb model then doesn't apply. Not always true and not always this difference from the Coulomb model is utilized, but it's true that the real magnets often at least somewhat differ from the Coulomb model.

"The Coulomb model is essentially the same as to say... science has labeled electrostatic charge as a plus and a minus charge and that opposites attract, likes repel.   O.U. with magnets, does not violate the Coulomb model, it is dependent upon it."

FALSE. A difference from the Coulomb model is necessary for overunity, as with poles with spherical fields there cannot be overunity no matter what is the setup. At that the Coulomb model may to some extent apply to some parts of the setup, but this is not the cause of the overunity.

"The field of force around a permanent magnet is not a sphere.  But it is common to many magnet shapes that there is a symmetry present... from one or more view points."

Yes, but important f is not where the symmetry is present, but where it is not present. And important for overunity is the difference from the Coulomb model, not the setup corresponding to the Coulomb model.

"On might as well drop discussion of the forces measured within a 3d field as being symmetrical or not, as this is not a cause of O.U. in itself.  It's not a case to argue either for or against. It's a WAST OF TIME in that context."

FALSE. Read the above, a complete lie and misleading.

"Tilting the magnet does not change the basic facts"

FALSE.