Roll on the 20th June

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi All
When I was talking about how hard it is to measure the strength of repelling and attracting magnets I forgot to mention when attracting magnets bond you no longer have two magnets but one bigger stronger magnet and thats another reason you can't tell it one magnet is stronger at attracting then repeling as I said I think there the same up until the attracting magnet bonds and becomes one bigger magnet, the only true test is the one I said because that shows the strength of both sides of a magnet before any bonding happens.
Oh about having the electromagnet a 3 and not 7 if you look at the design I showed you all the electromagnet is between 3 and 4.
Take Care all
Graham

[Craigy]

Its quite simple magnetic physics unfortunately.

The BH curve of a Magnet varies with the applied magnetic field . In the absence of another magnet a magnet will remain at its retentive state. When another magnet approches our test magnet in attraction. Our magnet will leave its retentive state and travel up the bh curve , increasing in strengh until it can increase no more as it would be saturated.

In Repulsion the the magnet leaves the retentive state and travels down the BH curve, effectivey loosing power until it either demagnatises or flips its pole.

Hysteresis is well known in ferromagnetic materials. When an external magnetic field is applied to a ferromagnet, the atomic dipoles align themselves with the external field. Even when the external field is removed, part of the alignment will be retained: the material has become magnetized.


A family of B-H loops for grain-oriented electrical steel (BR denotes remanence and HC is the coercivity).The relationship between magnetic field strength (H) and magnetic flux density (B) is not linear in such materials. If the relationship between the two is plotted for increasing levels of field strength, it will follow a curve up to a point where further increases in magnetic field strength will result in no further change in flux density. This condition is called magnetic saturation.

If the magnetic field is now reduced linearly, the plotted relationship will follow a different curve back towards zero field strength at which point it will be offset from the original curve by an amount called the remanent flux density or remanence.

If this relationship is plotted for all strengths of applied magnetic field the result is a sort of S- shaped loop. The 'thickness' of the middle bit of the S describes the amount of hysteresis, related to the coercivity of the material.

Its practical effects might be, for example, to cause a relay to be slow to release due to the remaining magnetic field continuing to attract the armature when the applied electric current to the operating coil is removed.


Hysteresis loop: magnetization (M) as function of magnetic field strength (H)This curve for a particular material influences the design of a magnetic circuit.

This is also a very important effect in magnetic tape and other magnetic storage media like hard disks. In these materials it would seem obvious to have one polarity represent a bit, say north for 1 and south for 0. However, if you want to change the storage from one to the other, the hysteresis effect requires you to know what was already there, because the needed field will be different in each case. In order to avoid this problem, recording systems first overdrive the entire system into a known state using a process known as bias. Analog magnetic recording also uses this technique. Different materials require different biasing, which is why there is a selector for this on the front of most cassette recorders.

In order to minimize this effect and the energy losses associated with it, ferromagnetic substances with low coercivity and low hysteresis loss are used, like permalloy.

In many applications small hysteresis loops are driven around points in the B-H plane. Loops near the origin have a higher ?. The smaller loops the more they have a soft magnetic (lengthy) shape. As a special case a damped AC field demagnetized any material.

[The Eskimo Quinn]

oh that sucks i got up at 3am and posted here and it must not have worked.

[am1ll3r]

oh that sucks i got up at 3am and posted here and it must not have worked.

I think you may have accidentally posted in the wrong thread
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2157.280/topicseen.html

[The Eskimo Quinn]

Sorry craigy but, your experiment is false, if you read what i did say, i did say that the magnetic fields "are" equal.

now try this ice cream container or some such tape one magnet inside and place the other outside now start filling the conatiner with non magnetic objects and pull on the outer magnet until the field breaks when the load is too much, now turn you magnet around and try to push, you will hit the container before it will push.

you see the point in question is not do equal fields exist, i aready stated they do, the point is the strength of each field and the point at which they break. there is no equal or opposite reaction, in fact for those who really want to see the point, use marbles to fill the container, and keep removing them one by one until you can push, marbles remove divided by total marbles will give you the percentage difference. This will of course vary on the type of magnets. This also shows the flaw in the just a bigger magnet theory if there is a separation wall, as one can only pull on the other plus the added weights, and one can only push on the other plus added weights.

As to my point in the physics lesson it was shown true here again when the point was noted by one of our polite newtonians, where he states the gold scales have little or no friction yet the example was of a greater mass than a rod with weights and magnets. yet that is supposedly unworkable (must be newtonian steel in the axels that decides who goes up and who does not, silly me.)

Ok for those who don't understand why there is no difference i will explain, in true physics there is no central point for friction on a circle by weight or applied force.

that is why they build bridges using arches, why you can't break an egg end to end with you fingers and why a ball sits floating on a column of air without shooting up, the air actually pulls it down as much as it pushes it up.

engery will always find the path of least resistance, to that end a circle does not have one, so all friction is applied equally around the circle.

for those who think i ignore questions, i do not get much time between work,the website, the machine, the mail, and just trying to find to eat somedays. so i appologize for that.

@moganster

as to centrifuge, boy that is very poor science, get a string and tie a weight to the end and swing it around, does someone have a weight not making a circle??? wow that would be better science than this machine, centrifugal force is equal at all points so it is equally pulling toward the other side of the rod.

as to the other point a series of bar magnets in an arch would suffice even if the following wer not true, an arch magnet does hae a slight compression of fields due to the arch, but it is more common in small motor magnets(no doubt where you saw this) but a wide curve has almost none, in any event the argument is silly, if you start to get early drop off then move the arc around to maintain the perfect drop point.

as to badassbynight,

for all his negativity, he actually correct or at least i believe so in respect to permanent magnets at seven, but i explained this to oak and have tried it, there is a wall when the arm falls it does not pass over but bounces back due to this wall effect, now overweighting against the wall and sheilding should be ableto evercome this issue. but i have not personally achieved it, so i wll not quote it as fact.