Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

[sm0ky2]

Then how do you measure, and what do you measure? And how you then calculate the energy?

You calibrate the weight to known readings in accordance
to your scales.
For instance, if you zero the scales, then hang a weight that
reads 1N, (vertical). Then place them horizontally
and take the same reading on the string tied to the back
While attaching the hook to an immobile object holding the hook still.


and when your magnets (when scale is horizontal, with counterweight)
also pull the scale to 1N, you have equilibrium between both forces.
At this point, you know there are 2N of force between the magnets.
1N towards the magnet and 1N pulling away (spring)
This is your 0.
[edit: this may not read "1N" after you add the pulley, so use the
          'leveraged' value]

The difference between this point and a 0 reading is total 2N.
Allowing them now to move:
One force will get stronger and the other weaker, reflecting on your reading.


Restricting the pulley 1 rotation (or a whole number increment) you know the distance.
Or you can measure the physical distance of where the magnet moves to/from.


A change in the "weight" is roughly 1/2 of the change of the PE.
Converted to KE by the motion.


If you record the rpm you can use the acceleration equation as confirmation.

[sm0ky2]

The springs have a form of "moment of inertia"
I think this is what you are considering "friction"?
It's difficult to measure this by hand-pulling






By using gravity and a set weight on the pulley
there is a constant acceleration placed on the spring.
now you can watch the readings with more accuracy.
and see the change in acceleration.

[ayeaye]

For instance, if you zero the scales, then hang a weight that
reads 1N, (vertical). Then place them horizontally
and take the same reading on the string tied to the back

Great, and who will ever do that. When even my experiment, that is the most simple, no one ever replicates. Overunity research is in such a poor condition, no one ever measures anything.

In addition, all want self-runner. This is like a guarantee that no sef-runner will ever be made, because without measuring, it's like finding a needle in a haystack, practically completely impossible.

We, some people here, feel ourselves uneasy, because the things are not good.

What i would recommend, is to use electronic force gauge, instead of spring scales, because this spring inertia is a real problem. These cost a lot. Maybe some can make ones own, using a pressure sensitive resistor and arduino.

Even then, how to do that. Like you move one millimeter in a fraction of a second. How can one even see the reading, in so short time, Saving the maximum force, or even measuring history with readings and times, trying to use that together with the movement from the video, who ćan say.

But nevertheless the experiments can be done with spring scales. I used a spring scales with 5 N range, to say it again, these did cost $2.46 with shipping, from ebay.

Sm0ky2, can you draw a diagram of how you want your experiment?

[ayeaye]

What concerns the mu metal shielding, in this linear case, the measurements show that the attraction energy is less at the side of the big magnet, than at the pole of the big magnet. Thus, in this case, the shielding should be put to the side of the big magnet.

This, btw, is somewhat similar to what Naudin said. The attraction is more at the pole, than at the side. So the experiment in a way confirms what Naudin said. But, it is also possible to like, approach from the side, and leave at the top, the way that the attraction is greater at the side. It depends on the trajectory by which we move, what it appears to be. The experiment was about linear movement, movement on a straight line, with the magnet tilted 45 degrees.

Also, the attraction force was not really greater at the pole, but the force decreased more rapidly at the side. Thus, the energy of attraction was greater at the pole, than at the side. Is this the same as saying that attraction is greater at the pole, than at the side, this is a matter of interpretation. Naudin was also rather poorly translated, so it was difficult to understand what he really meant.

What concerns the shielding, it also does other things, like it also takes a part of the pole inside it. So i cannot say that there is any way to apply shielding, to increase asymmetry in that case.

What can be said for certain though, is that such things should be tried and measured separately before trying to make the final device. Because like trying to make a permanent magnet motor, and only then to find that the solution was wrong, is much too wasteful. Thus the importance of these experiments.

[ayeaye]

The friction is not constant, but it is greater, the greater is the component of the force down, one should understand that. The experiment however showed that the maximum friction at the left side was less than the maximum friction at the right side. The friction was in a way proportional to the measured horizontal force, and the force was less at the left side. Thus that the difference in friction made it to appear that the energy was more at the left side than at the right side, was certainly not true.

The friction force is at the opposite directions when the scales stand still, and when the scales move. The real force at a point is thus the average of the forces measured in these two ways. In my calculation i also calculated the real forces, assuming that the friction at one side was constant, because i couldn't measure with scales moving, at all measured points. This is a good enough approximation. And still by these calculations, the energy was more at the left side, and less at the right side.

What may be possible, is to try to measure moving force from every point to the end of the field. Maybe this would enable to estimate the moving force at more than one point. But the inertia of the spring makes that also difficult. I was only able to measure the moving force by one movement, at both sides.

Please see that i went it through, did all the experiment for the first time, measured the energy gain. Thus also seeing all the problems that there are in doing such experiments. There was nothing, and now there is something, even if not perfect, this is a huge difference, and very difficult to achieve. Columbus egg.