pat. 3469130 Jines, J.E. Magnetic Motor, does it work?

[tbird]

wrong!  next.

tom

[Low-Q]

iwh,

i'm not sure which design low-q is talking about, but that statement does not apply to jines.

maybe you still haven't figured out how it works.  there are 2 stators containing magnets.  while one side is attracting the rotor, the other side is being prepaired to attract the rotor.  if "a magnetically responsive block, (soft iron or steel) will be attracted to a magnet." is true, then depending on the strength of the magnet, we can assign a force value it creates.  in one of my earlier post i gave this value 7 units.

this 7 units is transferred to the power shaft which contains 2 cams.  these cams are set to apply an outward force to actuating rods (or bars)(64) attached to Shields 63.  since we have predetermined the force of attraction (10 units because it is closer to the magnet than the rotor block) of the shield to the magnet, we can size the spring (74) to be just strong enough to remove the shield so it doesn't cover the magnet.  with spring in place and cam not interacting, the net force to move the shield back over the magnet would be 1 unit.  this could vary a bit due to travel distance of the shield.

this brings us to where i have concerns.  with cam in place and magnet uncovered, the shield, in a distance of 1/16 of the circumference of the cam/rotor, will be required to recover the magnet.  the good news is only 1 shield is a load at any given time.  that is when the magnet is to be covered.  uncovering is the job of the spring.

jines cam arrangement can be changed so the covering process is not as big of a load, but i'm not sure of the effect of a longer uncovered time.

if you want to point fingers at something that might be a problem, this is probably a good place to start.

tom

The travel distance of the shield, or any shields, is a very important detail. One thing is to discuss forces, but forces alone are nothing what so ever without the distance it will provide force. No matter what magnet motor we discuss, the shielding will never be able to do anything without energy input. The energy that has been spent or provided are totally dependent of the product of average force per the given distance. If the units you are using are the forces. If you spend 10 units over a distance of 7cm, the product of these are the same as 7 units over a distance of 10cm - they have provided or consumed the same amount of energy. We must always focus on the energy, and not let us bee fooled by the forces alone. If the "units" corresponds to the energy, I strongly believe your figures are wrong as long the equations ends up in more or less than 0.

Let us turn this motor (in the patent we are discussing) "up side down" and let the rotor bee the magnetic shielding, and the shield be the part that is suppose to do work. Now it is easier to see how the actual rotor are as much dependent on the shielding in order to do work, as the shielding are depended on the rotor in order to do work. They will always be inside the same system, in the very same closed loop. In a closed loop there has in average not happened anything, because during one revolution of the rotor, no matter how the shields are controlled and moved around, it ends up in the same configuration as when you started - at the very same potential.

It is still impossible to create energy out of a conservative force like permanent magnetism -  by "conservative" we mean "no change", also by "permanent" we mean "no change".

The motor in the patent will not work.

Vidar

[Low-Q]

hope,

before we scrap jines design all together, let's find the flaw in it first.

to all those who instantly say "this will not work"......

"if you are given the choice of a 25 cent, 10 cent, 5 cent, & 1 cent coins to make 30 cents using any 2 coins with the condition one of them can NOT be a 5 cent coin, what 2 coins would they be?"

.....you will probably say "it can't be done".

if you know the answer, please post a reply here.  no explanation is needed at this time.

let's see who the real thinkers are and who are just "talking heads".

tom

I would buy an item for 11 cent, repair it, and sell it for 30 cent.

[wings]

We must always focus on the energy, and not let us bee fooled by the forces alone. If the "units" corresponds to the energy, I strongly believe your figures are wrong as long the equations ends up in more or less than 0.

Agree!
just some considerations
In the the patent, 7 shielding plates are over the relative magnets and the operating springs are compressed, just one off and the relative spring is not compressed.
The rotating magnets running out on larger radius, the stator magnet are bit inside all seem designed to suck (operate) the shielding plate in traction way not pushing???  at least near balanced.

 

[tbird]

The travel distance of the shield, or any shields, is a very important detail. One thing is to discuss forces, but forces alone are nothing what so ever without the distance it will provide force. No matter what magnet motor we discuss, the shielding will never be able to do anything without energy input. The energy that has been spent or provided are totally dependent of the product of average force per the given distance. If the units you are using are the forces. If you spend 10 units over a distance of 7cm, the product of these are the same as 7 units over a distance of 10cm - they have provided or consumed the same amount of energy. We must always focus on the energy, and not let us bee fooled by the forces alone. If the "units" corresponds to the energy, I strongly believe your figures are wrong as long the equations ends up in more or less than 0.

Let us turn this motor (in the patent we are discussing) "up side down" and let the rotor bee the magnetic shielding, and the shield be the part that is suppose to do work. Now it is easier to see how the actual rotor are as much dependent on the shielding in order to do work, as the shielding are depended on the rotor in order to do work. They will always be inside the same system, in the very same closed loop. In a closed loop there has in average not happened anything, because during one revolution of the rotor, no matter how the shields are controlled and moved around, it ends up in the same configuration as when you started - at the very same potential.

It is still impossible to create energy out of a conservative force like permanent magnetism -  by "conservative" we mean "no change", also by "permanent" we mean "no change".

The motor in the patent will not work.

Vidar

vidar,

now we are getting somewhere.  nice reply.

i don't have much time now (maybe tomorrow) to catch all your points.  i do think i have some good counter points.  for now i'll just do some quick replies to the other question at hand.

tom