A Treatise on the Magnetic Vector Potential and the Marinov Generator

[TinselKoala]

I have attempted to explain this device many times. Perhaps my explanations and descriptions of its behaviour have been too complicated, I don't know.
For an easily accessible description of some experiments, see Jeffrey Kooistra's articles in Mallove's old Infinite Energy Magazine. He called it the "Warlock's Wheel".

It is important to realize that this is a _current_ driven device, so have available a high current, low voltage source of DC power for your experiments. If you can supply 10-20 amps it should be sufficient to see all the effects in a well constructed apparatus.

Anyone experimenting with this device should strive to accomplish the following in the finished apparatus:
1. Make your apparatus so that all three elements are co-axial and free to rotate independently. The three elements being the magnet armature, the 'stator' ring, and the brush structure/power supply.  Early explorations can use fixed "brush" contacts to the non-mobile ring to see how the magnets behave alone when current is injected into the ring.

2. The stator ring should be planar, not cylindrical as shown in the first drawing above. That is, something like a flat copper vacuum gasket (which are ideal for this use and readily available on Ebay.)
3. The brushes should be arranged so that they can make contact with the stator ring in two ways: Either on the outer edge of the flat ring, or on the INNER edge of the flat ring. Mercury, GalInStan, or similar liquid metal brushes will be best. It is this comparison that is the most revealing, and also the most unbelievable, and also the most neglected by researchers.

4. Preferably, the entire power supply including the brush structures should be also mounted coaxially and be free to rotate independently. You want to be able to see if there is a back reaction to the _brushes_.

5. Use some kind of remote control to turn the power supply on so that the apparatus isn't perturbed.

I used mercury brushes, two nine-volt batteries in parallel, and a simple laser-pointer actuated optical switch, along with a little logic circuitry, as my final build's power supply.

Marinov said to use a split cylinder magnet, with one half flipped and reattached. I simply used two cylinder magnets side by side NS and SN (on either side of the axis of course) with iron keepers connecting the ends.  Kooistra glued his copper ring to a styrofoam cup and suspended it with a thread over his magnets, and used pools of mercury to make the brushes, and stuck feed wires in by hand. I think my own build of this is the most sophisticated I know about and  is the only one capable of demonstrating all of the phenomena associated with this device. Unfortunately... it went missing when ISSO left the laboratory in SFO, and I haven't build another one.

I have however constructed a "Marinov Slab Motor" which simulates the one-turn ring with many turns of wire, and uses Hall effect commutation, and also... may not have an armature back reaction.

[TinselKoala]

Hi F6FLT,

Could you put your magnet + core assembly onto the middle of a freely rotatable platform which has very low friction? 
I say this because if there is any torque as supposed, then it may be so small / weak that it gets lost in your relatively rigid ring-supporting wires.  Maybe you could fasten the bottom middle part of your core with a plastic or wood piece into the inner diameter of a single ball bearing while you fix the outer diameter of the bearing into say a vice.
Unfortunately, the magnetic flux as close to the magnet assembly as is shown with your ring distance in your setup may be rather low due to the closed magnetic circuit, this is why I think the developing torque could be very weak (if there is any torque, that is).

When I suggest this,  I suppose that the setup would operate 'backwards'  i.e. the magnet + core assembly should turn or at least react a little the moment the ring current appears.  Maybe a pulsed input should also be tried to see any small initial reaction if the backward operation is possible at all.  Perhaps an AC input to the ring could also be considered if the magnet+core assembly is the rotor, I wonder.

Gyula

When set up properly, the ring and the magnets will both want to move when current is injected into the ring, in certain well defined ways.  But it is these ways that are most interesting. Be sure to test with ring contacts on outer edge, and then compare with ring contacts on inner edge.  The possible ring motions that can be seen are: driven in one direction or the other, and coasting freely. The possible magnet armature motions are: rotating to a position and locking there, and coasting freely. The directions of relative motion are important... and amazing.

[broli]

Hi TK good to see you around. And yes indeed you are one of few handful people who has performed experiments in this regard and would surely know what you are talking about. For this I have great respect for you as you are also part of the inspiration that kept me exploring this concept which has lead me on quite a journey. I don't agree on every point you made however out of respect I would like to respond piece way to each point if I may with my own experience and knowledge based on experimentation.

1. Make your apparatus so that all three elements are co-axial and free to rotate independently. The three elements being the magnet armature, the 'stator' ring, and the brush structure/power supply.  Early explorations can use fixed "brush" contacts to the non-mobile ring to see how the magnets behave alone when current is injected into the ring.

This is very true in fact I would go one step further and suggest to use a multi turn coil instead if a high current source is a limiting factor. This was my own first experiment as well a few years back, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDS7KA3xfYQ
This experiment shows that the magnet assembly reverses rotation when current goes around it instead of across it.

2. The stator ring should be planar, not cylindrical as shown in the first drawing above. That is, something like a flat copper vacuum gasket (which are ideal for this use and readily available on Ebay.)

Things get more complex now, in fact I INTENTIONALLY made the ring cylindrical and would even recommend to reduce its planar dimensions as much as possible. See next comments for the reason.

3. The brushes should be arranged so that they can make contact with the stator ring in two ways: Either on the outer edge of the flat ring, or on the INNER edge of the flat ring. Mercury, GalInStan, or similar liquid metal brushes will be best. It is this comparison that is the most revealing, and also the most unbelievable, and also the most neglected by researchers.

The fact this has been neglected is very true besides your posts here I saw no other researcher pointing this out. However it is the very fact that the ring is of planar dimension that causes this. I have also shown this using an ionic liquid instead as you may know a few months back. And added 3 additional cases by having the brushes (electrodes) in all possible combinations. The behaviour could be fully explained by the Lorentz Force. The fact that there is NO rotating when the "brush" is centered on the planar ring proves this as well. This is the experiment as a reminder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frHOpzMDqSg
So this is why the ring needs to have little to NO planar dimension to it as we want to eliminate any sort of torque on the ring especially this classical Lorentz torque and hence the cylindrical ring.

4. Preferably, the entire power supply including the brush structures should be also mounted coaxially and be free to rotate independently. You want to be able to see if there is a back reaction to the _brushes_.

This is very important indeed. In fact I would even go one step further and say that any/all torque on the magnets is due to these wires coming from the power supply to the brushes and NOT due to the current going through the ring. This is actually seen in the first experiment mentioned in point 1 as the direction can be flipped. The challenge is to eliminate any motor effect as much as possible by using the correct geometry. And what you will see is that the induced EMF still is produced when rotating the ring.
There is a reason why the torque is so very low and why some researchers could not find any at all while others did, because there is little to none if the ring has very little radial dimensions. However EMF remains the same.

5. Use some kind of remote control to turn the power supply on so that the apparatus isn't perturbed.

I used mercury brushes, two nine-volt batteries in parallel, and a simple laser-pointer actuated optical switch, along with a little logic circuitry, as my final build's power supply.

Marinov said to use a split cylinder magnet, with one half flipped and reattached. I simply used two cylinder magnets side by side NS and SN (on either side of the axis of course) with iron keepers connecting the ends.  Kooistra glued his copper ring to a styrofoam cup and suspended it with a thread over his magnets, and used pools of mercury to make the brushes, and stuck feed wires in by hand. I think my own build of this is the most sophisticated I know about and  is the only one capable of demonstrating all of the phenomena associated with this device. Unfortunately... it went missing when ISSO left the laboratory in SFO, and I haven't build another one.

I truly salute you for your work and sharing it all these years. But a new generation must continue to explore further and beyond to what the previous has done.

and also... may not have an armature back reaction.

This is really the main conclusion of any experimenter who has gone down this path . It's just amazing how after so many years now this little forgotten device and pretty much theory on the Magnetic Vector Potential has not encouraged more to explore. However to encourage experimentation I keep sharing my work openly and freely and encourage any discussion on it, as this generator is doing something very strange very few have seen or explored.

[not_a_mib]

The Marinov and Ampere force laws for moving charges predict magnetism-like forces along the direction of motion of charges.  (longitudinal magnetism) Textbook magnetism only exerts forces at right angles to the motion.  The longitudinal force tends to vanish for circular loops and symmetric shapes.  The attached image suggests a possible experiment to try to demonstrate such a force.  Circular and square coils are placed next to each other as shown, with the round coil on conductive bearings so it could turn if there is any force exerted along its wire.  In classical magnetism the round coil should not move.

I had dabbled a bit with force laws a few years ago.https://overunity.com/2485/magnetism-without-the-magnetic-field/msg33676/#msg33676

[broli]

I don't think classical EM is wrong it's incomplete. It does not account for movement of a charge through a Vector Potential field. Which the total time derivative (aka Material Derivative) does. In the end it's a more complete form of electrical induction but in your design I see no induction taking place so what am I missing.