Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[aether22]

You will never rid yourself completely of eddy currents and losses. But by winding the coil as a heel end configuration, the apparent loss you refer to is of little significance. IMHO there is something to be learned by re-reading page 4 from fig 10 onwards, and page 5 from fig 14 onwards very carefully. There are IMHO some very important observations regarding magnetic behavior on those two pages.

Only reading this after having made my latest "It's HUGE" post, so I am interested in how you think is gets rid of the problem, I am reasonably sure it does not.
But I'll take your advice and read those pages.

[JustMe]

There is no evidence that it is a "potential booster". The device with the magnets and the coils imposes a very strong load on the motor - a load strong enough in some circumstances to stall the motor completely, as reported in the experiments. Certain changes to the device and coils, such as coupling some of its magnetic flux back into the motor through the steel shaft, relieve that wasteful load somewhat so the motor goes faster and wastes less power. Introducing a 50% power loss (say) and then making changes to it that reduce those losses to 45% (say) is NOT any kind of "booster" - unless you can see any other logic in this?

I'm truly trying hard to understand your point, but I just can't see it.  Most here are focusing on the potential of a novel and unexpected effect in a system optimized only to illustrate this novel and unexpected effect, and you want this system to do something uniquely productive right now. It took years and many wise minds to turn an initial observation of a bacteria free ring around an invading mould in a petri dish into the useful product penicillin. There are many arguments and approaches that are perfectly reasonable, but not particularly informative. To me your posts seem to fall into this category. Only time and patience will tell if this will turn into something that can be applied to increase efficiency. What's the hurry?

[markzpeiverson]

...But you say, ââ,¬Å"We know and can measure all forms of energy!ââ,¬Â  Oh really?  Thatââ,¬â,,¢s either arrogance or naivete talking...

markzpeiverson, I'm not sure who you're quoting but I didn't say that.

Hi PB:
no, wasn't quoting anyone in particular; it was a 'rhetorical' quote!

-M

[polarbreeze]

...Only time and patience will tell if this will turn into something that can be applied to increase efficiency. What's the hurry?

Some may think there's no hurry but doesn't it speak volumes that, based on Thane's timeline, 23 years have elapsed since work first began on this device, yet nobody has yet managed to demonstrate that it has the potential to improve efficiency - even though it would be extremely simple to put together such a demonstration and measure it objectively.

[JustMe]

Some may think there's no hurry but doesn't it speak volumes that, based on Thane's timeline, 23 years have elapsed since work first began on this device, yet nobody has yet managed to demonstrate that it has the potential to improve efficiency - even though it would be extremely simple to put together such a demonstration and measure it objectively.

It's hard to perceive you as objective when you spin this as a project that has struggled in fruitlessness for 23 years. The collateral observation that is solely responsible for this device and this conversation is barely two years old.  Because Thane's operating theory involves some pretty funky physics he is going to encounter even more roadblocks than a typical inventor.  I personally wouldn't find it wise to draw conclusions from the rate of progress at this point.

You call the measurements you propose simple, and others here have disagreed.  I don't have the technical expertise to form a judgement either way.  I do know however that potential to improve efficiency is a different animal than improves efficiency right now.