Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world

[nix85]

It should be clear to anyone intelligent that to achieve overunity best possible understanding of induction and all related phenomena is essential.
If that is missing one just goes down the blind alleys of wild ideas that lead nowhere, you can't build a skyscraper on foul ground.
I would suggest everyone, meditate on induction itself, understand it from all angles, as deep as you can. Then, you might start to see solutions.

[rakarskiy]

nix85,I didn't have time to read your "works".

According to the latter figure, the experiment that Christian MONSSHTEIN and Jean-Louis Naudin did, a conductor with the appearance of EMF, placed in the Bloch Zone, two converging oppositely directed magnets, CANNOT be explained by the intersection of the magnetic lines of the conductor. This can be vtyuhat, only a completely illiterate passer-by in this matter, he believes in it.
The conditions of the formula (E=B_mlv) with the intersection of magnetic lines cannot be fulfilled there.

Only when one magnet approaches, some part will intersect, but the dimension will be such that it will actually be impossible to induce an EMF.

In fact, the EMF is induced and the closer the magnet is to the conductor, the stronger the EMF. Here is a paradox that is very simply explained.
So we look in the book, we see a hole in it.

[nix85]

@rakarskiy I didn't have time to read your "works" either. Firstly don't misuse the term "bloch wall". The area between two
magnets is not a bloch wall, bloch wall refers to microscopic transitional zone where flux gradually changes from one polarity
to another between magnetic domains inside a magnet. I already shared this video here.

On the Bloch Wall and the Misconceptions Surrounding Peer Review

Two converging oppositely directed magnets/fluxes, CAN be explained by the intersection of the magnetic lines of the conductor.
This can be vtyuhat, only a completely illiterate passer-by in this matter, he claims otherwise. Look at the field lines at each
point in time, from the moment magnets are far away until they are at closest. Altho you did not explain it clearly, what you
are trying to say is that fluxes will merge above and under the wire, so supposedly wire will cut no flux, but you forget since
they are at equal distance from the wire, wire is always their point of intersection, in other words, before they merge wire cuts the fluxes.

And another thing, look how loop is closed and where exactly the magnets approach, at the corner of the loop. From this too it
is clear loop will see increase of flux in one direction, even if there was no flux cutting, which there is.

[rakarskiy]

     
nix85  made me laugh, I think - there is no point in listening to your fabrications further. Take your own calculations by first measuring the level of magnetic induction in the flea zone of the magnet.
The question arises, are you mistaken yourself or do you want to mislead?



PS
I give you a hint, this experience is directly related to understanding the operation of the synchronous generator and the Holcomb system itself. Raselli1's experience is the same (video link in posts above)

[nix85]

 
rakarskiy made me laugh even more. If you did "think" you would not post your flawed fabrications. First learn what bloch wall is,
also learn how induction works, and how is voltage induced. YOU take your own measurement of flux in the "flea zone" and calculations of induced voltage.

You never even clearly explained why you think there should be no induction in the 'experiment', i had to do it for you...

"Altho you did not explain it clearly, supposedly what you are trying to say is that fluxes will merge above and under the wire, so supposedly wire
will cut no flux, but you forget since they are at equal distance from the wire, wire is always their point of intersection, in other words,
before they merge wire cuts the fluxes."

And, like i also wrote, in addition to this, once the fluxes merge, loop sees increase of flux in one direction, also causing induction.

Instead od funny ahominems, try to stick to scientific arguments.

There is no question if you are mistaken, cause you are 100%, but question arises, why you want to mislead rather than admit your mistake and learn?