Heins' new videos and few corrections

[nix85]

Nix85
Did you think about what you just said?...

The question is did YOU think before you wrote that drivel. Let me paint it simple for you, overunity systems by definition do not lower but ELIMINATE need for extrnal power intput.

because Wheeler..

LOL, i could have expected you are follower of that clown who claims he discovered double vortexial nature of magnetic field ahahaha, HE HAS NO SHAME. Dielectric this dielectric that, what a parrot only most ignorant can fall for.

That's debatable and an opposing voltage is not always induced when a current starts to flow in a conductor.

Opposing voltage IS always induced when there is is change of flux through the conductor.

I understand the reasons why are beyond your current understanding

LOL, you remind me of myself years ago when i knew nothing but thought i knew everything. It might take you not 3 years but 3 lifetimes to get where i am at now and i have zero intention to brag.

Even with all i know now, how to cancel lenz, how to completely neutralize it, correct structure of the cosmic forcefield, that is, 6 axis of time and how they create illusion of 3d space, 4 great subforces, imablance of speed and density of two components of the Great Light and it's omnidirectional pressure in every point of space, x49 increase of density of matter, speed of light and rate of time flow for each of 7 "physical" planes, true nature of gravity and it's polar opposite, 2 ways to degravitate matter and how to produce the polar etheric current.. things you and your idol Wheeler don't have the slightest idea about, and still i am fully aware all i know is still very limited in the infinity. You on the other hand, know NOTHING.

So curb yourself down, kid, humble yourself, unless you want to remain at your present state of ignorance for good.

[nix85]

I think this is clear but i'll point it out anyway, you can see that with 45° offset as claimed by Heins, when magnet reaches the mid of the coil there is still 1/4 of the positive current phase left (red) and this 1/4 accelerates the magnet + at the same time approaching south pole magnet is attracted by the coil, these two gains combined MIGHT explain it (especially considering it is known that magnetic attraction is slightly stronger than the repulsion).

Besides, in one of those slides he says offset can be anywhere from 50 to 90°, so, that makes drag part smaller and repulsion bigger, so that should be it.


I do not recommend anyone to go down this path, think in simpler terms, right angles and air cores.

[lancaIV]

Yes,it is not easy.


Newton laws alone do not give results..


So we need Newton laws and these laws independent Eulers Drallsatz ( in calculation later to Planksche Wirkungsquantumzahl)




https://patents.google.com/patent/US9934897B1/en Figure 17


Jack Hildenbrand magnetic valve : 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US7453341B1/en


The inventor made a valve comprising a permanent magnet and an electromagnet such as shown in FIGS. 6 and 7.
The permanent magnet was individually capable of creating 70 lbs. of magnetic pull. In the first test, 8 watts of power (i.e., 5 volts DC at 1.6 amps) was supplied to the electromagnet, thereby making the electromagnetic also individually capable of creating 70 lbs. of magnetic pull.
In other words, the energy force of the two magnets was substantially equal.

When the power was supplied to the electromagnet, the combined magnetic field of the permanent magnet and the electromagnet produced 280 lbs. of lifting force on a load.

In a third test, the inventor used two valves situated adjacent to each other. The power supplied to each valve was 8 watts (i.e., 5 volts DC at 1.6 amps). As a result, the total power used was 16 watts. Nevertheless, the valves created 560 lbs. of lifting force on a load.





                                                                          inversal process :


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=6342746B1&KC=B1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20020129&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

FT54=(B/2)2A/,m0=B2A/4m0=FT26/4.


It is therefore seen that dividing the same amount of magnetic flux along two flux paths rather than along one flux path reduces the magnetic holding or coupling force on an armature by one-fourth rather than one-half as might have been expected. This unexpected magnetic holding or coupling force differential, resulting from multiple flux paths, can provide advantageous properties in linear, reciprocating, and rotary motion devices.


question :  M= r F  and M=  h F            M positive= M ccw       or           M negative = M cw   ?


magnetical leverarm and magnetical loadarm ?




https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBiot-Savart-Gesetz

[nix85]

Yes,it is not easy.

I suppose you want to say you did not understand what i explained so far so your concluded it's not easy altho all is very easy, it's only the lack of understanding that makes it appear hard.

Newton laws alone do not give results..

I agree with that. I am glad you mentioned Newton cause i can now share very simple and powerful phenomena, yet totally unknown which i termed 4th Law of Motion which says:

Any unbalanced mass spinning 360° with varying speed or oscillating within 180° or less converts centrifugal force into linear acceleration.

In other words you can literally 'swim' in space. Imagine you are floating in space, you got a hammer in each hand. As you swing them in front of you horizontally in opposite directions (to cancel the backtorque and avoid spinning, otherwise it could be just one hammer) close to 180° but no further, resultant vector is pure unidirectional acceleration, that is, you are pulled forward just as if someone pushed you from behind.

This will probably not be understood by most of you, it confuses people as it confused me in the beginning but it is very simple and it works. What will confuse you the most is how is there no back-reaction from stopping the hammers from going beyond 180° and that is the key point...

THEY ARE STOPPED NOT DIRECTLY BUT AT THE AXIS OF ROTATION - BY FRICTION - OR, BY MUSCLE CONTRACTION IN THIS CASE. 0 BACKLASH.

Every time you swing a mass in front of you you are violating conservation of momentum and energy.

Simple demonstration of this principle > as long as ball keeps oscillating in the front, yellow area, centrifugal force will keep pulling the system forward interacting with nothing but space itself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuTMYgQDUzs

[lancaIV]

When you take all freedome degrees,yes then it is easy !


But the application from the formulas are mainly fixed related Bezugspunkt/reference point in a 3 dimensional coordination system


You ,nix85,goes into the Minkowski space-time continuum > 3d  !


Die Freiheit nahm sich dessen Schueler auch, der spaetere Dr.phy. Albert Einstein