Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > Benches > PhysicsProf (Moderator: PhysicsProf) > Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited

2024-11-27, 04:37:17
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: [1] 2 3

« previous next »

Author Topic: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited (Read 34176 times)

PhysicsProf	Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « on: 2014-07-11, 17:27:34 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	I've uploaded two videos on recent experiments involving magnetic coupling and Ed Leedskalnin's PMH. Not sure I understand everything here; two questions at the end of this post. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ze2tMt8G0Y&feature=youtu.be 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utdrWqrEQyw&list=UUgY1w73JtptzOlzD9X7VTaQ (I get a hefty electrical shock, but decide to show the vid anyway. That's how we learn sometimes!) I've added another video with TWO QUESTIONS awaiting answers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwp4M7bapmc&feature=youtu.be From the caption: Quote Please provide your explanations for: 1. Two steel balls attracted by ferrite-magnets, I pull on the outer ball. Why does the inner ball go with the outer ball rather than staying with the magnet? (Isn't the magnetic field strongest at the face of the permanent magnet?) 2. What lights the LED? Researcher Russ Gries tests an Ed Leedskalnin device, two years AFTER an electric current flowed in his two coils. Notable experiment by Russ, pulling the "magnetically clampled" bar off the U and seeing an LED light brightly. Afterwards, there is no magnetic "sticking" of the bar to the U (not magnetized). So -- what lights the LED? PS -- good work, Russ! I'm not totally sure about your "magnetic current in both directions" explanation, but I really like the experiment and I'm trying to understand it. And I've taught physics for many years, first with the Univ of Idaho, then at BYU for over 21 years, and I'm still learning! I hope you enjoy the videos. I got up real early and did the last one... To me, this is fun stuff!

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #1 on: 2014-07-11, 17:32:15 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Great to hear from Russ Gries in comments to that third (latest) video of mine. Russ writes: Quote rwg42985 4 hours ago Yep! I sound so funny in that video haha You guys talking about this over at OUR? I'll need to join.. ~Russ I hope do join us, Russ! I have a few other questions for you also. I appreciate your research through the years.

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #2 on: 2014-07-11, 19:14:47 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Well that's very interesting indeed. What is needed is some energy measurements, if you charge a cap to a known voltage and power capacity and dump that into the C-I core to lock it, and then charge the cap again to a known level and discharge that in reverse polarity into the coil, then at least you will be able to gauge the power/Joules required to lock/ unlock. Then a method of determining the power from flyback when the keeper is pulled would need to be found.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #3 on: 2014-07-11, 20:09:19 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Quote from: Peterae on 2014-07-11, 19:14:47 Well that's very interesting indeed. What is needed is some energy measurements, if you charge a cap to a known voltage and power capacity and dump that into the C-I core to lock it, and then charge the cap again to a known level and discharge that in reverse polarity into the coil, then at least you will be able to gauge the power/Joules required to lock/ unlock. Then a method of determining the power from flyback when the keeper is pulled would need to be found. Good points, Peter. We're thinking along the same lines. That last = determining the power or energy from the flyback, is going to be tricky. But perhaps dumping into a cap will do the trick... thinking...

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #4 on: 2014-07-11, 20:23:53 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	With regard to question #1 Quote 1. Two steel balls attracted by ferrite-magnets, I pull on the outer ball. Why does the inner ball go with the outer ball rather than staying with the magnet? (Isn't the magnetic field strongest at the face of the permanent magnet?) Would someone try this with a spherical magnet (in place of the ferrite magnets)? And attach two steel spheres (unmagnetized to begin with), and pull the outer one? I've done this with a neo, cylindrical magnet. Here, the inner steel ball (separated from the magnet by card stock to prevent damaging the neo) stays with the magnet! (I think because the inner ball is B-saturated, probably not the case when I used the ferrite magnets.)

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #5 on: 2014-07-11, 20:41:12 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Hi PhysicsProf Trouble with transferring energy to charge a cap is I2R losses allowing only 50% of the energy to be transferred or maybe that does not apply from these coils, i am not sure. If you have a hall sensor, it would be interesting to sniff those steel balls before and after to find field strengths. Peter

Russ	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #6 on: 2014-07-11, 22:08:57 »
Group: Guest	hi guys, so ill do my best here to watch this, i currently don't have a lot of time to put forth alot of effort on this, but one thing you should do is read all ED's Magnetic Current Book. now the trick to reading ed's book is that you must read it line for line and don't move to the next line / page if you don't understand the line/page your on... the book is not a code ( i don't believe) its just wrote by someone that did not do English that well.... so. Sweet16... hummm any how, here is the book: see attachment so what can i say, i can say that the videos i maid along time ago and have sense learned a lot more. so ill try to help where i can. first, the ball comes away with the other ball as the Steal has more " magnets" in it. they accumulate best in steal. so even tho a permanent magnet has is the " source" of the field the steel can "hold" more "magnets" than the magnet can. The thing is is that steal wont hold those permanently like a ferrite will. ( or not as strong) but in the presence of a magnetic field on the steal its stronger than the magnet its self ( or at least there acting like it) so that tells me that ed is right, Steel dose hold more " magnets" than most other metals. i know this was not that good of an explanation but its what you get hope this helps, next week i will make a video of some of my PMH's and ideas. or ill do photos. one of the 2 i also charged my full size PMH and did some testing with the scope and i believe that we can get the same energy out as in, in this system. as in if the pulse is short enough to charge, and the bar comes off fast enough the energy is the same. ( no losses) its a perfect transformation between "electrons" and " magnets" ( to ed even the magnets are coming out of the battery to charge the PMH, there is not such thing as an electron) maybe this is a clue to nature... ~Russ PS, from now on when i post just ignore any spelling / gamer errors. read through it spelling.. who needs it... ------------------------ second 1945 Magnetic-Current_Edward-Leedskalnin_51pp.pdf (3170.17 kB - downloaded 302 times.)

Slider2732	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #7 on: 2014-07-11, 22:18:37 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1399 ... .-.. .. -.. . .-.	Hey Russ, great to see you here @PhysicsProf Good gracious, those were superb learning video's and that shock answered many a question. Also the 2 steel balls staying 'PMH'd'. All was explained to my wife just now, who kindly nodded occasionally lol Could it be theorised, that Ed was using mini EMP's to break the gravity bond of the coral ? He would have built up the electrostatic charge with his horizontal hand turned magneto device...then moved outside to the coral rock, suspended under the tripod. It would be insulated, non grounded and have a coil of wire wrapped around it. The box at the top was 'singing' the resonant frequency of the coral. On touching 2 wires together or applying a little reverse voltage, the EMP fast pulse removed gravity. He then moved his rock by using 2 cone shaped wave guides which emitted the resonant frequency, until, on landing at the correct placement the rock would again be Earth grounded. It would immediately regain it's usual magnetic lines of gravitational force and therefore it's usual characteristics of weight. If so, then we also have an extension to the similar theory for moving the stones on the Giza plateau. Stone resonant frequencies would be the next logical port of call. Hopefully they're low...around a few hundred Hz or low kHz. I've got a couple of magnetized neo balls, but I don't know about standard steel ball bearings. Will have a look, am certainly very interested in this --------------------------- ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

Russ	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #8 on: 2014-07-11, 22:23:49 »
Group: Guest	also, one thing to think about is that if a neo magnet did allow for the ball to stay to it... why? if you get the 2 steel balls close to the magnet ( in the presents of a magnet field) they will stick to each other. whats really going on there? oh and also, anywhere there is a point or edge the magnetic strength is stronger there. ( the magnets bunch up at the edges as the magnets trivial faster through steal than air) just like a corona discharge will find those points... ( maybe there all magnets) ~Russ

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #9 on: 2014-07-11, 22:47:34 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Hi Russ Thanks for the info and paper. There's some great experiments in ED's paper, would make interesting demo videos if someone has time to try them. Peter

Russ	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #10 on: 2014-07-11, 23:04:24 »
Group: Guest	first off, do the experiment's your self first!!! don't watch theses unless you have read the book in grate detail. i know who is going it do that right? well at least read each part in the book before watching theses: kinda corny / odd but you know... its YouTube and they do a good job really. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8IIjASBKas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTrY2FgLjtk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpIrcmNiay4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFbU5-RmRls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY4_z5fsM88 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr3lnuckNbM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7qjhH4omXE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnEliRVExQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9dN6ML0IwM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xIvdee3460 ~Russ

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #11 on: 2014-07-12, 04:10:52 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	A warm welcome to you, Russ. I'm working my way through the vids and the pdf/book you have provided. Thanks! Quote from: Russ on 2014-07-11, 23:04:24 first off, do the experiment's your self first!!! don't watch theses unless you have read the book in grate detail. i know who is going it do that right? well at least read each part in the book before watching theses: kinda corny / odd but you know... its YouTube and they do a good job really. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8IIjASBKas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTrY2FgLjtk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpIrcmNiay4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFbU5-RmRls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY4_z5fsM88 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr3lnuckNbM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7qjhH4omXE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnEliRVExQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9dN6ML0IwM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xIvdee3460 ~Russ

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #12 on: 2014-07-12, 04:13:58 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Russ, I wish to ask your opinion on something. You have worked on various approaches with a talent for experimentation and hard work - and alacrity! My question: after all you have observed, what approach do you see (right now) as the MOST LIKELY TO SUCCEED? (in providing a new energy source for mankind) I hope you don't mind my asking. I ask the same question of others also -- we have lots of BUILDERS and quality observers on this forum IMO.

Matt Watts	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #13 on: 2014-07-12, 04:59:45 »
Group: Guest	Having known Russ for quite a few years now, I too am curious, though I think I already know the answer. What I am sure of is that Russ has never given-up on the Stanley Meyer technology. If it is real and can be readily replicated, Russ will accomplish this one goal in his lifetime. I would bet my own life on that statement. Russ thinks in a completely visual manner--call it a gift. The logic is embedded in the object. I know for a fact if he sees something that makes sense geometrically, he can manipulate it his mind and build a device to prove it. A classic example of this ability is his use of 3D Printing. If ever there becomes a machine available that you can slip on to your head, that takes mental images and directly manufactures parts, Russ would be without a doubt the best person to use such a machine. As a group of researchers and experimenters, the best thing we can do is take our ideas and put them into coherent visual form. If we can do that, Russ can take it the rest of the way. I have seen it too many times to think otherwise. We do that and Russ can have it built and in operation before we even know what parts to order. Myself, I wish I was able understand the Steven Mark TPU well enough to describe its operation. I know if I could, Russ could build one in a weekend. And yes, it would be fully OpenSource for all.

TinMan	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #14 on: 2014-07-12, 06:33:05 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	An interesting topic,in which i have done a fair bit of experimenting with as well. Thing is,you dont need coil's or even a U shaped core for this to work. A straight length of wire passing through the middle of two large blocks of steel or iron will give the same result-a continuous magnetic coupling between the two pieces of steel-until that coupling is disconected. Once the coupling is broken,then the two plates will not stick together again,until a current is passed through the wire. I will see if i can find the two steel plates,and do a video on this for you guy's. --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #15 on: 2014-07-12, 07:02:14 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Ok-no need to find the block's,as i found a video of another guy who has shown this effect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJSDYYaF3LA --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #16 on: 2014-07-12, 07:31:00 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	OK i can now answer why the 2 balls stick together. Ed says a sphere does not naturally have poles unless magnetized that way. So when your 2 steel balls are placed together and a magnet is attached, the steel balls domains align to allow a north/south flux permeate through each ball, when the magnet is pulled away, they are left slightly magnetized and therefore maintain a north/south configuration, note it takes 2 steel balls to maintain the field domains alignment, when 1 of the balls is pulled away from the other then the steel balls return to their magnetic rest state which is with no north/south orientation and they no longer stick together. Also The reason the 2 steel balls stick together when pulled away from the magnet can be explained by field concentration, the surface area of your magnet end which connects to the steel ball is larger than than the area of the steel ball that touches the magnet, therefore the magnetic field lines are spread out and enter the sphere across a larger area which gives a weak attraction due to the spherical interface. or to put it another way, a flat surface to spherical interface has a weaker coupling than spherical to spherical interface. The 2 steel balls have identical field patturns at their interface and most of the flux lines are concentrated at the point of contact, therefore the physical force to separate the spheres is greater than that required to separate the sphere/ magnet interface. « Last Edit: 2014-07-12, 10:27:13 by Peterae »

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #17 on: 2014-07-12, 13:51:36 »
Group: Guest	There is a conventional answer to both questions. It has to do with remanence. Yes indeed, magnetic flux is concentrated at smaller surface areas during attraction. This produces a strong magnetization of the bearings. This magnetic force will be stronger than the rectangular magnet until the attraction between the bearings is broken. This, coupled with remanence, is the explanation for the first question. Remanence is the reason for the light pulse when breaking the keeper away from the U-shaped magnet (PMH). The PMH works best using well grained iron/steel - low frequency power transformer core materials, etc. It does not work well with iron powder ceramic (ferrite) cores because they are specifically designed and formulated to minimize remanence.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #18 on: 2014-07-12, 15:46:02 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Thanks, Peter. I'd like to test your theory replacing the flat magnet with a spherical magnet... Next; Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2014-07-12, 13:51:36 There is a conventional answer to both questions. It has to do with remanence. ... The PMH works best using well grained iron/steel - low frequency power transformer core materials, etc. It does not work well with iron powder ceramic (ferrite) cores because they are specifically designed and formulated to minimize remanence. Actually, in my experiments here I use FERRITE cores -- C and I and a coil -- and the magnetic clamping effect works very well indeed, as I show in the vid of my experiment 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utdrWqrEQyw&list=UUgY1w73JtptzOlzD9X7VTaQ This is an example of why I'm not sure we fully understand this "magnetic remanence". Also, why does this "remanence" COMPLETELY collapse when I run a small current in the opposite direction from that used to establish the clamping? 9V (9000 mV) to establish the clamping and 70 millivolts suffices to destroy it!

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #19 on: 2014-07-12, 17:26:14 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2014-07-12, 15:46:02 Thanks, Peter. I'd like to test your theory replacing the flat magnet with a spherical magnet... Next; Actually, in my experiments here I use FERRITE cores -- C and I and a coil -- and the magnetic clamping effect works very well indeed, as I show in the vid of my experiment 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utdrWqrEQyw&list=UUgY1w73JtptzOlzD9X7VTaQ This is an example of why I'm not sure we fully understand this "magnetic remanence". Magnetic remanence is also called residual magnetism It depends almost totally upon the 'ampere-turns' applied and the formulation of the ferrite. Some ferrite formulations will have a fair amount of remanence but the ease of transition is the main factor for their normal use. Ex: Applying a reverse current to demagnetize will take much less energy in most ferrites, especially the ones made for high frequency, compared to a piece of highly grained steel. Quote Also, why does this "Remanence" COMPLETELY collapse when I run a small current in the opposite direction from that used to establish the clamping? 9V (9000 mV) to establish the clamping and 70 millivolts suffices to destroy it! For magnetization and demagnetization it is the ampere-turns that matter, not the voltage. Measurement of the applied reverse current to remove magnetization is 'coercivity'. Performing the act is called 'degaussing'. Degaussing always takes much less energy than magnetizing, AFAIK. If you measure the energy required to magnetize and demagnetize you should find that demagnetizing energy will be less than half of magnetizing power. This may be due to the unmagnetized state being the result of randomly polarized magnetic domains equating to net-zero magnetization. This is seen in solenoids and relays having separate taps or coils for energizing, holding, latching and unlatching. The holding or unlatch coil is normally a much higher resistance because it require much less current and energy to perform that task.

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #20 on: 2014-07-12, 17:36:56 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Thanks WaveW yes remanence for the steel balls. but is the C-I core also remanence,why did PP get the electric shock during demagnetization, this was more than remanence surely.

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #21 on: 2014-07-12, 17:53:42 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Are there relays that latch butthen have the power removed, if not they could be made using the C-I effect

Matt Watts	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #22 on: 2014-07-12, 18:21:04 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: Peterae on 2014-07-12, 17:53:42 Are there relays that latch butthen have the power removed, if not they could be made using the C-I effect Yes, it would seem the PMH concept would make latching relays a no brainer. So I ask, why do we not see these devices coming from manufacturers, or have I just not been looking close enough?

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #23 on: 2014-07-12, 19:49:17 »
Group: Guest	Magnetically latching relays have been in use since the telephone companies enabled dialing instead of asking the operator to make the connection. Now, you may not find them in use except for high power switching systems. Q. The shock? A. Faraday induction and a momentarily open circuited coil. The voltage could have been hundreds of volts or more. At the moment the keeper was removed the stored energy in the magnetic field is released by the magnetic field collapse (or - change in flux density - your preference). There are relays that latch using residual and/or permanent magnetism.... huge circuit breakers, too.

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #24 on: 2014-07-12, 20:36:23 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	OK thanks WW It certainly makes sense, so have we solved the PMH. So the ferrite PP is using is hard, IE barium Ferrite as this has a high remanence, PP could try the same thing with soft ferrite and the hold on the keeper should be less. or maybe it's just the VA energy as he is using a pretty hefty coil. If a really high remanence material can be found then it maybe viable to use this as an energy storage means, although i suppose cost per volume would be too high. very interesting anyway.

Pages: [1] 2 3

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u

2024-11-27, 04:37:17

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines
XHTML
RSS
WAP2