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

[wizkycho]

Hi all and koen !

1. magnetism from permanent magnet is free and can do work for thousend years (it is proven !!! at least with magnetic transistor experiment...and many other exp.), isn't that so koen1 ? (this is something "science" do not wan't to know. Magnetic tranzistor should be in schools allready
,it is a real natures phenomenon and behaviour)

2. now, moving magnet on principle of equilibrium or balance (see my simple gif animation at replay 89 - this topic) - requires
very little energy to overcome only real friction of mechanics. this friction energy, if setup is moving at same speed,
is constant no matter how much magnets you use.

3. strenght of fanner movement is proporcional (linear) with strenght of free flux (point 1)

so energy at point 2(INPUT) is always much much lower then energy of 3(OUTPUT), no matter how much you multiply output (you can put 100 NdFeB magnets) and get only 30% of that energy through fanners and you will already have 30:1 for output team and you don't have to wory 'bout that load(weight) on output will dissrupt setup and make it underunity - like lenz can and does.

Many tests need to be done to establish how much exactly fanners can extract from given field strenght and what are the best conditions
and dimmensions to get maximum percentage (blue) from fanners, but allready 50:1 is not so hard to imagine. So you could help allso.

When we establish how much fanners can get, even simpler (less moving parts, no need for balancing) setup can be made using magnetic transistor effect (3-4 times amplification of flux). so fanners should be able to extract at least 50% or more to get 3:1 O:I .....and then "amplify" that setup with another three in branching style and you have 9:1 and so on and on ....easily to get to 50:1....

Wiz

Wiz

[Koen1]

Hi all and koen !

1. magnetism from permanent magnet is free and can do work for thousend years (it is proven !!! at least with magnetic transistor experiment...and many other exp.), isn't that so koen1 ? (this is something "science" do not wan't to know. Magnetic tranzistor should be in schools allready
,it is a real natures phenomenon and behaviour)

What are you talking about "magnetic transistor"? I know of no such thing. Yes, we can guide magnetic flux through a path quite easily,
but that's not the same as a transistor... Do you perhaps also have a "flux capacitor" then?
But yes, permanent magnets can last for hundreds if not thousands of years, depending on what type of permanent magnet you're
talking about. Ferrite magnets are almost eternal, but the new supermagnets like Neodymium based ones are definately not.

2. now, moving magnet on principle of equilibrium or balance (see my simple gif animation at replay 89 - this topic) - requires
very little energy to overcome only real friction of mechanics. this friction energy, if setup is moving at same speed,
is constant no matter how much magnets you use.

Yes, the magnetic equilibrium principle does work to reduce drag.

3. strenght of fanner movement is proporcional (linear) with strenght of free flux (point 1)

With "fanner movement" you mean the spreading out of the washers I suppose?
Sure, so the washers seperate when field lines cause them to repel eachother.

But you said we're using the magnetic equilibrium principle and two sets of magnets (or two horseshoe magnets but horseshoes typically
are not permanent magnets so let's say we're using sets of attracting p.m.'s), to cause equal flux exposure of the washers while allowing
us to remove one of the sets... right?
That seems to imply that you're keeping the washers seperated all the time, and just moving the magnets...
How does that produce any movement in the washers?
Surely to make the washers move (seperate, then fall together again, then seperate again, etc), you'll need to have the flux decrease...?
After all, if there is constantly a magnetic field that keeps the washers seperated, there will be no movement of the washers...

So how are you going to extract energy from a bunch of washers that remain seperated all the time?

so energy at point 2(INPUT) is always much much lower then energy of 3(OUTPUT), no matter how much you multiply output (you can put 100 NdFeB magnets) and get only 30% of that energy through fanners and you will already have 30:1 for output team and you don't have to wory 'bout that load(weight) on output will dissrupt setup and make it underunity - like lenz can and does.

What input? You haven't indicated where you're inputting what. What is your input?
Is it the energy you need to move the magnet sets? And how then does simply moving them generate any output at all? How are you inputting that energy?
And how are you getting energy out of the washers ("fanners") in the first place?
Just making them seperate does not magically turn them into perpetual electricity sources or whatever...

Many tests need to be done to establish how much exactly fanners can extract from given field strenght and what are the best conditions
and dimmensions to get maximum percentage (blue) from fanners, but allready 50:1 is not so hard to imagine. So you could help allso.

If you would just start with explaining how you think you can extract energy from a couple of seperated pieces of metal at all, that might help.
Because it's not the magnetic equilibrium principle that I don't get, it's simply that I just don't follow how you think energy will spontaneously
flow from a few seperated pieces of metal, that's the part I don't follow.
Is it so hard to understand that, to talk about energy extraction at all, we need to have a viable method of actually collecting energy?
That's what I still haven't seen described...
And that's why, in my very first post, I asked if I had missed something.
Now please, if you want to lecture me, explain that to me first, before you start yapping about hypothetical output increases.
First tell me where you're getting your output.

When we establish how much fanners can get, even simpler (less moving parts, no need for balancing) setup can be made using magnetic transistor effect (3-4 times amplification of flux). so fanners should be able to extract at least 50% or more to get 3:1 O:I .....and then "amplify" that setup with another three in branching style and you have 9:1 and so on and on ....easily to get to 50:1....

Ok, so now I get where you got your ratio. Now explain where you extract the energy, please.

[Yucca]

Still having trouble seeing how the seperation of a few washers is going to produce 50 times
the input energy...

Since Wizkycho apparently can't or won't explain that,
perhaps Yucca, Dave or Butch could explain it?

All I see you guys talk about is a method to remove an attracted magnet
from the washer stack by replacing it with another magnet, thereby
minimalising the energy input needed to move the magnet out of
its attraction position...
But how do the washers produce the 5000% output?

Or is it "just" a variation of the LaFonte Equilibrium effect, "just" serious decrease
of the magnetic "drag"?
So that the resulting motor doesn't experience nearly as much drag, and thereby
behaves much more efficient than a "normal" motor?
Is that the big breakthrough?

Because with all the focus on the washers I got the impression that you were
actually saying the washer effect itself was responsible for the 5000% OU...

Hi Koen,

Provided the output force does not directly couple to the input forces then the actual OUT:IN ratio obtainable is only limited by the exact design and production quality.

See the hypothetical device below.

The big flywheels are geared together and are driven from an exernal source like a small electric motor. The mechanism causes the mags to reciprocate along free guides like linear bearings.

It would only require small energy input only to overcome friction, because the magnetic forces exerted by the magnets are symetrical:

• As the magnets are going together the attraction forces will speed the flywheels up.


• As the magnets are going apart the attraction forces will slow the flywheels down.


• However because the forces are symmetrical the flyhweels average speeds will not be affected by the magnetic forces.


• The flywheel mechanicaly integrates all of the forces over time. The energy within the flywheel remains pretty constant, only losing a little to friction.

So to mantain a constant speed the flywheels will have to be fed only enough power to overcome friction. Put the apparatus in a vacuum and use very free bearings and this input power can be got REAL low. We will call this average input power requirement X Watts.

Now the seperating washers will produce an up force as they seperate, you could use this to raise a weight using ratchet or produce electricity with mag and coils etc. We will call the average output power of the sytem Y Watts.

COP = Y/X

I don't know the origins of the 50/1 figure, maybe just a guess?

Note:
My only doubts about the effect at the moment is that the input sees the output more than we think. For myself I will have to verify physically that the effect yields COP>1.

Yucca.

[ramset]

Yucca did you look at Erhfinders web site http://www.forgotten-genius.com/documents/home_1.html In his news section is a video of something similar and running
      Chet

[wizkycho]

koen1!

1.http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2222.msg130730#msg130730
and many other experiments.
don't be affraid to call it Magnetic transistor, this is new component to "real science" - it exists and it should be called like that cause emidiately one knows that small magflux input yields (3 - 4 times) stronger field at output.
Can it make work is another question ? but allso has been proven it can.
Permanent magnet is flux capacitor, only differnce is it is allmost Infinite. (so I still wouldn't call it that way)
We all know what magnetic resistor is and how it is made.
We can allso make magnetic diode.

Magnetic transistor can not work without filled capacitor (or battery) - just like transistor can't. the difference is magnet is Infinite,current battery and capacitors are not. soon we will have magnetic schematics of some device.

If you do not admitt to yourself magnetic transistor (or call it what you like) effect exists and that it is so, there is nothing left for you to understand. Interesting as hero member you believe in energy amplification (transistor powered by void) but can not believe in magnetic amplification (transistor powered by magnet) !?! why is it so ?

1a. smCo and NdFeB are eternal (but not of the highest grades over 1.5T - still experimental) allso, if not overheated, overMechaniclyAbused, overCounrterPolarised, chemically unprotected, overXraied, overRadiated. have other infos about this ?

2. OK

3. One magnet pair is spaced from another magnet pair by width of rectangular washer. Fanner(washer stack)s are 1mm spaced one from another. magnet pairs are same width as fanners.
So every other fanner is overlaped with one magnet pair at a time.

Since there are washers (at same distance) all the way magnet travels with no stky points no drag back no foreward attraction. Just friction.
and if speed of their movemet is same mechanical input is constant and is low.

4. input needed to overcome only mechanicall friction (bearings etc.)

5. one(first) fanner is fixed and mech energy is extracted from last nonfixed

6. conversion of linear mech energy to electrical using linear permanent magnet-coil arrangement.

Wiz