Searching for Buddy in promising magnet motor Project.

[dieter]

@ Smoky

When you stick iron to a magnet, in any form, shield or not
You redirect some of the field into and through the metal.

That is because of it's high permeability. Trying to connect to the other pole, the magnet is searching for that other pole all the way trough the iron. It will prefer to follow the iron over air, even if that brings it further away from that other pole, but especially when it brings it closer.

fA real simple test to show if your motor will work as conceptualisedWould be to place a magnet in front of a coil and without moving the
Magnet - stick of iron around the magnet to "decrease" the field from
the coils perspective.
And see if any induction occurs.

Yes, it does. Actually, this was the first thing I noticed, which started the whole thing.
Whether you increase or reduce the magnetic strength at the location of the coil, both induces current and the coil doesn't care how you do that, by approaching a permanent magnet, or by shielding a fixed magnet.


You should really watch my FEMM simulation pics and read the corresponding explanations on Page 3 of this thread, because you are asking questions already answered, more than once But I get used to it ^^

[dieter]

@ Vidar

We haven't found a way around yet. That's true. However, I think that peopole stopped looking for it because the evedence is so obvious. Maybe they think "Why try to deny something that nature has already proven a godzillion times". It's basicly not worth it - my opinion.


Cause and effect is still valid untill someone cause something that doesn't have any effect. Or find the effect that did not have any known cause - like the Big Bang. Yes "known cause" - we just know there was a cause, but not what cause.

Well, godzillion doesn't seem to be a quantum in a scientific sense. Besides, nature doesn't do a lot of observable induction tests. However, an observation is no evidence.

I am now studying free energy concepts for like 20 years and what really puzzled me is the fact, that I never saw this particular concept in any plan. Not in Kelly's 1000 pg free energy plans collection and not in any other design, except maybe in 2 or 3 concepts that have claimed OU, which I mentioned in my 2016 paper or pdf on Reverse Lorentz Force, in the files section.

Additionally I realized that not only most hobbyists around here haven't yet understood the fundamental principles of induction, but also every Pro (eg. Masters degree in Electrotechnics) I ever tried to explain this particular concept. This led me to the conclusion that Science has become "Hear-say", a parrots field of expertise, rather than doing tests, observations by your own, leave alone to question or challenge any of the law-labeled observations.

Cause and effect, that's true, and I agree with anybody, saying we need energy to do work. But if there is any fluctuation in the forces we experience, we can easily attach a wheelwork to it. Just like in the cirquit of water on this planet, a heat cycle, driven by the energy of the universe with all it's motion and heat.
Please watch, think about and maybe comment my FEMM screenshots on Page 3 of this thread, thanks!

[Low-Q]

Yes, I've watched it. When you say "Yes, attract the presumably escaping rotor, while in reality the rotor is getting closer.", then there must be the opposite when the rotor physically escapes. It is attracted on its way out too, so I assume that the forces (Actually torque, since this is a rotary system) involved in one complete cycle, is zero.


Still, you have some interesting thoughts, but I'm not 100% confident if this is going to work as intended.


There are many adopted opinions out there, you're right about that. Primarily people that does not do physical experiments, or have personal experience, but only listen to others what they have to say. I do a lot of physical experiments myself, but I must be relatively sure that the initial theory is worth putting into practice. However, sometimes the experiment does not fit the theory, and the theory must therefor be rejected. Practical experiments always win :-)


"But if there is any fluctuation in the forces we experience, we can easily attach a wheelwork to it"
Well, to be honest, I think that any fluctuations in the force field that might cause wheelwork for free, is an illusion. Because, if it was true, you have experienced a system that is actually picking up energy that initially did not had any cause. As far as I know from all my experiments, I have experienced that it's not possible.


The only way to prove or disprove an idea, is to leave the drawing board and start building.


Best of luck.


Vidar

@ Vidar



Well, godzillion doesn't seem to be a quantum in a scientific sense. Besides, nature doesn't do a lot of observable induction tests. However, an observation is no evidence.

I am now studying free energy concepts for like 20 years and what really puzzled me is the fact, that I never saw this particular concept in any plan. Not in Kelly's 1000 pg free energy plans collection and not in any other design, except maybe in 2 or 3 concepts that have claimed OU, which I mentioned in my 2016 paper or pdf on Reverse Lorentz Force, in the files section.

Additionally I realized that not only most hobbyists around here haven't yet understood the fundamental principles of induction, but also every Pro (eg. Masters degree in Electrotechnics) I ever tried to explain this particular concept. This led me to the conclusion that Science has become "Hear-say", a parrots field of expertise, rather than doing tests, observations by your own, leave alone to question or challenge any of the law-labeled observations.

Cause and effect, that's true, and I agree with anybody, saying we need energy to do work. But if there is any fluctuation in the forces we experience, we can easily attach a wheelwork to it. Just like in the cirquit of water on this planet, a heat cycle, driven by the energy of the universe with all it's motion and heat.
Please watch, think about and maybe comment my FEMM screenshots on Page 3 of this thread, thanks!

[dieter]

@ Vidar,


quote:
....[size=78%], then there must be the opposite when the rotor physically escapes. It is attracted on its way out too, so I assume that the forces (Actually torque, since this is a rotary system) involved in one complete cycle, is zero.[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]Well, here you're wrong. See, if the shield has passed by, the coils polarity flips and therefor repellse the shield, that is a pm to the coil side.[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]quote:[/size]
I think that any fluctuations in the force field that might cause wheelwork for free, is an illusion.


Again wrong and easily proofable: if I had a magnet that turns on and off, I had a motor, would you agree? Any fluctuation, such as on-off, could drive a motor. Of course there is no fluctuation in a PM. But if there was one.


quote:
The only way to prove or disprove an idea, is to leave the drawing board and start building.[/size]

[/size]
I' doing both simultanously anyway.[/size]

[/size]
Thanks for your opinion, btw.[/size]

[dieter]

Man this forum has some issues with my Browser. I can't even go back and edit the posting, so, sorry for the tags mess.