Magnetic OU principle, You should really take a look at this !

[wizkycho]

Sorry, I missed this message from you, simply because of your odd expressions. Not being rude, I'm just telling you.

But I can tell you that your saying is not true for a fast moving motor.
The discs will not have the time to shift position simply due to sheer inhertia.
And if you make the discs to thin they not have the power to perform any useful work.
Least but not last, the mechanical solution to extract power from repelled fanners will consume any excess energy.

In my book there's still no free lunch here. But feel free to build it and surprise me. Hopefully I'm wrong in this matter.
You see, I want overunity as well. Just like anybody here. I'm not against it you know, but I have to question solutions that doesn't seem to add up.

sorry... Now I didn't see your post

who said it has to be fast it has to do complete MECH work on given load(weight),and then move on
Only with two fanners and one magnet pair there is allmost 1input:10output for OU
so lot's of free lunch allredy with linear setup.

I agree we need something efficient to concentrate multiphased fanners...

Wiz

So You Saw but can not see it through yet

[Ergo]

Why don't you build a straight track of washers on a stick.
Along these washers you can easily move two magnets being firmly mounted to keep them from getting stuck to the washers.
It would be enough with twenty piles of washers.

Then test how easily you can move the magnets along the track. Try at different speeds.
Then place some heavy lead or perhaps a non metalic compound on top of each pile to simulate work being extracted. It must be really heavy.
Move the magnets along the track again at variuos speeds and feel the difference.
If there is no force difference I find it very interesting. Then you might have something here.
Until then I rest my case.

[drsquires]

This is in reply to the suggestion that this effect "gets around Lenz".  It doesn't really "get around it".
Lenz's law applies to changing magnetic fields.  If the field in an EM coil is unchanged by the motion
of the steel elements there can be no Lenz back reaction.  The Lenz reaction is an inertial reaction
or resistance to a changing field.  If there is no change, there is no Lenz back reaction.  The evidence for this
will be found in the fact that the coil inductance is unchanged over the full range of allowable motion
for the orthogonal solenoid structure.

FEMM simulation shows no change in inductance out to the 4th significant digit.
All other systems of solenoids or motors exhibit a change in inductance due to the changing
reluctance of the magnetic circuit for a given excitation level of current.

If the current is held constant and the moving parts of the system are moved the inductance changes.
This changes the magnetic field causing a Lenz inertial back reaction resistance to the change.

So the more accurate description is that there is no Lenz reaction because there is no change in
inductance.  There is nothing to cause a Lenz reaction.  It isn't "gotten around".  It just isn't there
because the magnetic circuit sees no change in reluctance or inductance.

Regards,
Dave Squires

[drsquires]

"You ramble, wizkycho.
Cogging has nothing to do wether a device is overunity or not. Can anyone please explain precisely how this device is supposed to be 50:1 overunity.
In my opinion there is nothing remarkable going on. The discs are naturally repelled from each other when a field is applied.
The magnetic field source can come from moving permanent magnets or static electromagnets but there is always a cost involved.
And there is nothing speaking for the cost being less when using discs compared to a ordinary solenoid with a center hole that is pushing/pulling a rod magnet when energized.
It is exactly the same principle. As long as no one can justify the 50:1 claim I will reject this as another wishful thinking."

Well, it's not wishful thinking.  It's just a bit on the high side. 
The range would be in the 20:1 to 50:1 range for an EM version using coil excitation. 

Here is how you get there...

1. The inductance is unchanged in the coil regardless of what the expansion elements do.
2. This allows reactive power excitation at some resonant frequency.
3. Losses will be copper resistive losses, iron hysteresis losses, friction, and windage.
4. IF those losses are managed well and kept in the 2% to 5% range then you get the case where the
    resonant drive circuit only need make up for those losses.  So you have a case where the OUT/IN
    ratio can be between 50:1 and 20:1. 

So one could conceivably have an efficiency or COP in that range.  This means converting reactive power
to real power with very little loss.  Do it badly and you could easily be under 10:1 COP or less.

Dave Squires

[Butch]

This concept is simply amazing. Its so logical that I am amazed that no one has thought of this before. I wish you luck with all your work Butch

Raui,
Working with fanner magnets in moving sheet steel as a teenager was my inspiration. We are putting together a super simple test device to make overunity obvious to everyone. Anyone can put it together from radio shack parts for a few dollars. We are holding release of full scale devices for a short period.
Will post super simple proof of overunity device.
Thanks,
Butch