PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-27, 22:39:54
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
Author Topic: Where i'm at 1+1=3  (Read 34692 times)

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4728


Buy me some coffee
Well today I learned the damnedest of things while messing around with another design.
It took me about 3 hours to work out what was going on, and it turns out that the mass of an object can be increased without actually adding any mass to it physically  :o
Knowing what I know now, I think I actually built this one ass about.
These PM fields really are tricky little SOBs
But this is something I can now use--something I can base my next design on  O0

Video coming soon on how to add mass to a ferromagnetic material, without actually adding any mass physically.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 329
Well today I learned the damnedest of things while messing around with another design.
It took me about 3 hours to work out what was going on, and it turns out that the mass of an object can be increased without actually adding any mass to it physically  :o
Knowing what I know now, I think I actually built this one ass about.
These PM fields really are tricky little SOBs
But this is something I can now use--something I can base my next design on  O0

Video coming soon on how to add mass to a ferromagnetic material, without actually adding any mass physically.


Brad

So your gears finally also started spinning huh, good  O0. I will start by showing them what "friction" can do, you can start by showing them what its magnetic form can do. However it wont take long before I enter the domain of magnetism as well. So you better keep up the pace.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 275
Quote
the mass of an object can be increased without actually adding any mass to it physically  :o

Changing the mass of an object using a magnet was not your idea.
It was many centuries ago that Jonathan Swift wrote about the flying island of Laputa.  ;)

======================================================================
Quote
I don't think you know what my idea is.

Can we see this flying island?
No. I can't . unfortunately. :(
Gulliver saw this. O0
« Last Edit: 2024-05-31, 11:08:51 by chief kolbacict »
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4728


Buy me some coffee
Changing the mass of an object using a magnet was not your idea.
It was many centuries ago that Jonathan Swift wrote about the flying island of Laputa.  ;)

I don't think you know what my idea is.

Can we see this flying island?


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
No
The prototype only produces 90-92 watts,
But with a more precise build, 200 watts is obtainable.

Do you still have the prototype that produces 90 watts?

Quote
Yes, calculated using the prony brake method.

I've seen a lot of poor examples of DIY Prony brakes.  Achieving smooth braking action, steady torque readings, and accurate RPM indications can be challenging.  A large flywheel may be needed for designs that produce significant cogging (similar to smoothing a pulsed circuit with a large cap).     

Quote
I never claimed i measured 200 watts.
I stated that the units that are going to be handed out would be 200 watts.

My apologies, your OP made it sound like you were pretty far along after two years of development, to the point of being ready to have a more rugged version professionally machined, and that you were "downsizing" your design for the units to be distributed...

Quote
Because we learnt from the last saga-the RT
I posted countless videos, taking precise measurements exactly as you asked me to, and look what happened.

Frankly, I have no clue as to "what happened" regarding the RT.  The last comments Mark E. and myself made regarding your measurements was along the lines of "barring any shenanigans", your measurements proved that you had indeed achieved OU.  The next step we were discussing was the use of a high efficiency buck/boost to close the loop to attempt self-running.  At that point, something happened at your end and you and your project went silent.  To this day, I have no idea what really happened that caused you to stop working on or discussing the RT as openly as you previously had been.   


If you still have the 90 watt prototype of your all magnet motor (or any self-runner), and need to be able to explain why it works, I can suggest several experiments and measurements that would be a good start in that direction.  As we did with the RT, we can treat your motor as a "black box", wherein we only need the results of the suggested experiments and measurements.

Before digging into the realm of the "quantum", the initial tests should be geared toward ruling out environmental sources.  These will require your prototype to be mounted to its own platform with any required "adjustments" rigid enough to allow the unit to be located and oriented as desired.  A phototach or equivalent should be mounted as well to monitor RPM.  A way to load the motor, mechanically or electrically, should also be mounted to the motor's platform.  I would suggest using an electrical load, particularly if your motor "runs away" when unloaded.  This can be a separate shaft or belt driven generator/motor (preferred), or coils located such that your magnets pass by them, connected to a simple electronic load used to regulate the speed (and provide additional measurement data).  This doesn't have to be a large load, just whatever is needed to maintain a given RPM.  Using a zener to drive a pass transistor into a resistive load would allow no load startups with "fair" speed regulation. 

How difficult would it be to make your prototype meet the above requirements?

PW
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 80
Gonna Try This. No Gate.   No idea if it will work.  Seems the magnetic domains line up on paper.

Gonna be hard convincing 2 like poles to stay together, But I will try

Diametrically polarized matched with regular would be even better, but I do not have diametric ones ATM.

« Last Edit: 2024-06-03, 02:53:22 by floodrod »
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 80
Ok- Crude  test complete.  Results Look promising..  Attract In / Repel Out seems to work.  Slight problems at Neutralization stage (at TDC) that needs tweaking.

You know where to find me if interested in seeing updates as I go.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 420


Buy me some coffee
Ok- Crude  test complete.  Results Look promising..  Attract In / Repel Out seems to work.  Slight problems at Neutralization stage (at TDC) that needs tweaking.

You know where to find me if interested in seeing updates as I go.
This is not my scene- but looking from the outside here is a thought.
In my opinion, the only way to get through the sticking point is to use gravity assist.
So a cross between a gravity motor and a magnet motor.
As an example. you can get to the top dead center and beyond using magnets.
Then you use gravity to fall downwards and hope the momentum gets you through the sticking point.
If successful then you repeat and voila!
The device will only work in upright mode.
Good luck. (You can cut me in when you make your first million).


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KW charge on 1 plate of a  capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 80
This is not my scene- but looking from the outside here is a thought.
In my opinion, the only way to get through the sticking point is to use gravity assist.
So a cross between a gravity motor and a magnet motor.
As an example. you can get to the top dead center and beyond using magnets.
Then you use gravity to fall downwards and hope the momentum gets you through the sticking point.
If successful then you repeat and voila!
The device will only work in upright mode.
Good luck. (You can cut me in when you make your first million).

Yeah, that last idea did not work as planned.  I can eliminate the sticky spot, but I end up getting resistive forces elsewhere.   I have a new, more complicated setup I am building out to test.. 
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
...
In my opinion, the only way to get through the sticking point is to use gravity assist.
...

It will be useless. Whether it is under the effect of magnetism or gravity that the object moves, it does so because of a potential difference, magnetic or gravitational, between the arrival and the departure.

On a loop, the potential difference is zero since the departure and the arrival are at the same point. And since the work of a force deriving from a potential does not depend on the path followed, the work is globally zero whatever the conditions of potential variations on the path or their types.

In other words, the force only works on those parts of the circuit that have a potential difference. The moving object will therefore never be able to complete the circuit indefinitely since by looping the path, you eliminate the potential difference and therefore eliminate the cause of the effect.

I think it is time to make systems in accordance with the laws of OUR universe, and not with those dreamed of an imaginary universe.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
F6FLT
Quote
It will be useless. Whether it is under the effect of magnetism or gravity that the object moves, it does so because of a potential difference, magnetic or gravitational, between the arrival and the departure.

Of course, it would help if someone had a clue what a magnetic or gravic field are. It's kind of like claiming to understand cars but never having driven one or understand how they work. It just lacks credibility in my opinion.

Quote
On a loop, the potential difference is zero since the departure and the arrival are at the same point. And since the work of a force deriving from a potential does not depend on the path followed, the work is globally zero whatever the conditions of potential variations on the path or their types.
In a closed loop yes but as we know there are no truly closed loops. They are only imaginary just like your lines and loops of force.

Quote
In other words, the force only works on those parts of the circuit that have a potential difference. The moving object will therefore never be able to complete the circuit indefinitely since by looping the path, you eliminate the potential difference and therefore eliminate the cause of the effect.

In fact, the difference in potential or energy state is the cause of a force on something. The force then becomes a secondary cause acting on the something causing it to move.

As well, the particles in an atom spin or loop in a "circuit" indefinitely. I asked ChatGPT why the particles in atoms can never stop moving and it had a circular reasoning meltdown, lol. It keeps repeating the same old gibberish that yes the particles can never stop moving but the motion is not perpetual. Then it tried to give me the old "perpetual motion machine" song and dance. So I said no it's not a perpetual motion machine silly I'm talking about the conservation of energy and motion, grade school physics. It obviously doesn't know the answer...

Quote
I think it is time to make systems in accordance with the laws of OUR universe, and not with those dreamed of an imaginary universe.

I like think of it this way, a few generations ago our descendants were basically running around in animal skins foraging for food but look at us now. The funny thing is each generation obviously had an ego problem and supposed they were as smart as it gets and nothing could change. It's strange isn't it?, everyone keeps saying nothing can change but it always does. It's almost as if everyone failed history class.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 275
As well, the particles in an atom spin or loop in a "circuit" indefinitely.
Particles spin around the nucleus forever, yes.But we can't take energy of it. Useful energy for us.
Then something will happen to the atom and it will collapse.
Why do we need such an eternal rotating wheel that stands under a vacuum hood and we cannot take anything from it ?  Only watch.
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Particles spin around the nucleus forever, yes.But we can't take energy of it. Useful energy for us.
Then something will happen to the atom and it will collapse.
Why do we need such an eternal rotating wheel that stands under a vacuum hood and we cannot take anything from it ?  Only watch.

If we cannot get energy from an atom then how do you explain nuclear energy like fission or fusion?. In fact, we already know how to get energy from atoms and it's found in any grade school science textbook. You may want to learn how nuclear reactors and stars work.

For example, your car engine burns a hydrocarbon fuel in the following reaction CxHy + O2 >>> CO2 + H2O. In effect all were doing is rearranging the atoms in the molecules which liberates some of the internal kinetic energy as heat (jiggling atoms). The kinetic energy in the hydrocarbon originally came from the Sun a star, to plants as light, animals ate the plants, the plants/animals died, were buried and reformed, ending up in oil and gas formations. Ergo, the kinetic energy in fossil fuels is renewable and considered solar energy because it came from a star we call the Sun.

Nuclear fission or fusion energy is similar and instead of rearranging the atoms in molecules were rearranging the particles in atoms. For example, the uranium in nuclear reactors was formed in star collision/explosions through a nuclear fusion process. The stars exploded, threw the uranium out into space, it landed on Earth and then we dug into the Earth to find it. Ergo the kinetic energy in uranium came from stars and we simply liberated the energy in our nuclear reactors.

To recap, kinetic energy can be stored in atoms and molecules and when a process rearranges said atoms and molecules the same kinetic energy can be released. So in fact, the thing you suggested cannot be done is what's actually happening everywhere in the universe. You literally could not be more wrong considering the facts we already know.

AC








« Last Edit: 2024-06-10, 21:18:41 by Allcanadian »


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4728


Buy me some coffee
Sharing this one with the public, as I know there are those working on the same version of the magnet motor.
How to remove the sticky spot at the crossover point- the easy way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EGSvgqZGNE


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 29
Hello
how far along is the project? Or did it die?
Greeting
Lota
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4728


Buy me some coffee
Hello
how far along is the project? Or did it die?
Greeting
Lota

The project is coming along nicely.
Update coming soon.

I would upload my latest PPT, but the forum does not allow for this file format.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 275
The project is coming along nicely.
Update coming soon.

I would upload my latest PPT, but the forum does not allow for this file format.


Brad
Regarding magnetic wheels as perpetual motion machines, my opinion is skeptical. Like this YouTuber:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dywk3u2ncHk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMZy6Oc91Fs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brJRnz0gAFo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogSO7SMggAk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RHKpZUqlu0
etc..

...
   
Group: Tech Wizard
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1195
Hi Brad,

If the size of the PPT file is accepted by the forum software, try to rename the file extension from PPT to say PDF or maybe DOC.  Then we would change it back to PPT after downloading.

Gyula


The project is coming along nicely.
Update coming soon.

I would upload my latest PPT, but the forum does not allow for this file format.


Brad
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1940
The project is coming along nicely.
Update coming soon.

I would upload my latest PPT, but the forum does not allow for this file format.


Brad
I purchased a new PC last year running windows 11 and microsoft 365 (after 23 years with my old one running windows XP and 23 years old Powerpoint) and was surprised to find I can now use "save as" to save my Powerpoint files in pdf format.

I also have an Icloud account where you can upload a ppt file and download it as a pdf.  May also be possible with a Google cloud account.

Smudge
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
I purchased a new PC last year running windows 11 and microsoft 365
I'm sorry for you
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 26
You can also turn it into a .zip and upload it as such.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
Quote from: sergh
Regarding magnetic wheels as perpetual motion machines, my opinion is skeptical. Like this YouTuber:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dywk3u2ncHk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMZy6Oc91Fs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brJRnz0gAFo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogSO7SMggAk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RHKpZUqlu0

I agree with Sergh. The idea that a permanent magnet system can be looped is based on a belief without any concrete evidence, either theoretical or practical, or else it would have to be provided.
A magnetic mobile moves because of a difference in magnetic potential, just as a ball moves because of a difference in gravitational potential.
As the work of such a force does not depend on the path followed but only on the potential difference, and the potential on a loop is the same at the start and at the end, it will remain zero over a cycle, no matter how the children try to make it pass the “sticky point”, which is only the potential difference on a short path, inverse to that on the long path.
It's like trying to get a ball that has rolled down a long, gentle slope back to the same height on a short, steep incline. In the absence of loss, it's possible, but in practice it's not, and at best it would be without energy gain. And it's easy to imagine the opposite, that propelled along a short path, the mobile could pass along the long path. Why we should think that action should take place in one direction and not the other is purely a matter of blind belief.
Putting the arrival and departure at the same potential level is equivalent to removing the cause of movement while hoping for perpetual motion without cause. And this is true whatever the type of force used, when it derives from a potential difference.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1940


I agree with Sergh. The idea that a permanent magnet system can be looped is based on a belief without any concrete evidence, either theoretical or practical, or else it would have to be provided.
A magnetic mobile moves because of a difference in magnetic potential, just as a ball moves because of a difference in gravitational potential.
As the work of such a force does not depend on the path followed but only on the potential difference, and the potential on a loop is the same at the start and at the end, it will remain zero over a cycle, no matter how the children try to make it pass the “sticky point”, which is only the potential difference on a short path, inverse to that on the long path.

May I interject with the effect of hysteresis?  This is well known in magnetism, a particular path is followed where you end up at the starting point but energy is not conserved.  Most people are familiar with the classical BH loop where the loop area represents energy loss per cycle (actually energy volume density).  You can plot current in a coil against flux through that coil and obtain a loop whose area yields energy directly in Joules.  You can do this with a classical AC transformer and obtain a loop for the primary current that represents energy input per cycle, the loop is traversed CCW.  If you do this for the secondary you obtain a loop that is traversed CW reprsenting energy output per cycle.

In your statements above you are quite happy to observe that there can be a loss of energy during that forward and inverse movement (e.g. due to friction) while "the potential on a loop is the same at the start and at the end".  Why can't you accept that there could be a source of energy doing the opposite?  Magnets have an enormous number of spinning electrons aligned whose effect can be modelled as an effective large surface current around the magnet, like large current though a single layer of closely wound superconducting wire.  As someone interested in FE why are you not looking into this as an energy source?

Smudge   
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Sergh

Quote
Regarding magnetic wheels as perpetual motion machines, my opinion is skeptical. Like this YouTuber:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dywk3u2ncHk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMZy6Oc91Fs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brJRnz0gAFo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogSO7SMggAk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RHKpZUqlu0

Your reasoning based on the fallacy fallacy is always problematic. Your also using the oversimplification fallacy, "the oversimplification fallacy occurs when someone distills a complex issue or topic down to a very basic or simplistic explanation or example, and then uses that oversimplified version to argue against the original complex issue". F6FLT likes to use these same fallacies as we can see from his last post.

For example, many claim we cannot get more out than we put in and all systems are closed. Unless of course the closed system is a box with a nuclear bomb in it containing uranium. In this case the energy in the uranium which could vaporize you and the city your in came from star collisions/supernova tens of billions of years ago in some other part of the universe. Which makes this argument that what we put in is always what we get out seem misguided at best. Nobody put in anything because the energy was concentrated in the uranium from the star collision before the Earth and our solar system even existed. This is a little different than a ball rolling down a ramp, lol.

AC
« Last Edit: 2024-07-24, 02:50:29 by Allcanadian »


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Smudge
Quote
I purchased a new PC last year running windows 11 and microsoft 365 (after 23 years with my old one running windows XP and 23 years old Powerpoint) and was surprised to find I can now use "save as" to save my Powerpoint files in pdf format.

I'm running windows 10 on a pretty fast laptop with a free program called "classic shell" to emulate the XP GUI. http://www.classicshell.net/
So we can have all the benefits of a new operating system without the present gong show they call a start menu/file system of windows 10/11.
I think the XP GUI which is very similar to Linux and Raspberry Pi is the most user friendly.

AC




---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-27, 22:39:54