top

Mylow Motor - A different claim of working PMM

Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | WhipMag Discussion/Development Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8   Page 8 of 8

Sun May 17, 2009 10:44 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Video Link?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 17, 2009 11:54 pm PostPost subject:
Magluvin
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 25 Nov 2008
Posts: 499
Location: USA

Reply with quote

The thing is that Mylows setup does not follow HJ in specific areas. The stator pole ends should be sharp. The thicker the poles face is, the wider the anchoring points are, there by the sharper tip have much better attract and repel angles and distances than the wide face pole, being that the 2 edges of the wider face decrease that angle/distance relationship to the surface of the rotor fields below it.

Also the permeability plate would increase the field strength of the rotor magnets N pole fields, and that is an advantage to any magnetic system.

Thirdly the magnets should be flatter to the rotor surface so that the S pole fields are available to the stator similarly as the N poles, as in distance to the stator. The taller the stator is from the rotor surface, or better yet, the further the N pole of the rotor magnet is from its S pole, that south pole angle relationship with the stators sharp edge pole, will be diminished compared to a shallow rotor magnet, thus reducing the forces we are trying to take advantage of.

Fourthly, maybe those spaces between the rotor mags can be substituted with S pole up magnets. According to the description of how the stator uses both poles of the rotor mags for desired effect. If I were into putting that much effort and money into it, I would go for all of the above on the first shot. Plus one more element that I believe would be an advantage to the whole, would be to have the rotor with the N poles facing out from the center, and the stators aiming toward the center, as in HJs Popsi cover motor.

Which leads me to the grand prize Scotty!

The stator is shown toward the inside of the rotor mags facing pole out from the center of the wheel, in which Mylow had first shown us. Mr. Green Right?

Stator on the outside would work as well, if it does work. And is easier and more convenient.

Magluvin and the Tinies
_________________
I always think of it like an electric motor, ya gota have pole switching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon May 18, 2009 12:53 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

There are many dynamics involved and each configuration has its pros and cons. What Mylow has done is find the best arrangement for each configuration.

One of the things not mentioned or demonstrated, but that would produce a very sharp stator interaction zone, would be to place a small horseshoe magnet inside a large horseshoe magnet with like poles together so that the configuration would be

N () N (((((((()))))))))S () S When viewed from the side with the heel pointing up and the poles pointing down. () represents gap space.

Because the N () N will push the flux away from each other, it will follow a curved vertical line downwards with the gap being filled with maximum flux density. Depending on the strength of the magnets, the curvature can be very smooth, like a half circle, or it can project nearly straight out from the poles for a meter or so and then curve sharply back on a near vertical path to the other pole. Both arrangements could have pros and cons and specific applications.

Mylow's staggered stators do something similar, but instead of an embedded field, he has a staggered overlap. In this case, the sharp flux in the gap runs on an angle when viewed from above. The angle will be perpendicular to the line that connects one pole to the other pole. IOW, if you draw a box around each stator pole and then draw a line from the center of one N pole to the center of the other N pole, you will have a line connecting the two. Midpoint on that line, draw a perpendicular across. That perpendicular line represents the flux density group in the gap between like poles. Therefore, this does create a focal point for the flux, but it is skewed and distorted by the curvature and overlaps.

I really think Sterling had convinced Mylow that someone would be able to take the heat off of him within a couple of days and when it looked like it wasn't going to happen soon I think he got depressed and withdrew. I wish I had the ambition that some of you show, but I prefer to think more than do, and I don't have the crafsmanship that many of you show. I do fine on paper as long as my machine shops do the cutting, I can do the assembly. I do have a feel for the magnetic interaction, and if I had the materials here, I would probably being trying to replicate it myself. Perhaps I can kluge something together - not pretty but functional...maybe Razz

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon May 18, 2009 6:32 am PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Magluvin,

Quote:

Magluvin and the Tinies


Do u have album out yet- where's the first tour being held??

ChrisfanofMagluvinandtheTiniesbis
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Mon May 18, 2009 6:18 pm PostPost subject:
evilscotsman
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 56
Location: United Kingdom

Reply with quote

Ok, very good points Magluvin, but you did miss out the one thing I was referring to.....and strangely enough HJ makes numerous telling references to this particular property. I hope you guys are ready for this, and that I am right, cos if other groups jump on this we may be trounced by previous "semi skeptics" replicas if you know what I mean....ok here goes...

As you know, HJ hinges his research on particle spins, especially the N particle H-Field. Now, he found by mapping the magnets using hall effect sensors on a CNC rig, that the spins are vorticular, something that was only recently confirmed by scientific (thesis) experimenters in electron microscopy that this is exactly the case.

Further to that, the spins are centred about the long edges of a bar magnet, and specifically the sharpest edges give the strongest spin fields. His famous track, that John Bedini "stole" from him to examine (but never gave back, along with Tom Bearden) has magnets that are bar mags, but arranged edge up, like a diamond as viewed from the end, not a square - capiche?

They touch, and the S particle H-fields are shorted out underneath, and it can pull a 35lb railcar along the track at speed such that it SLAMS into the backboard, maybe 20 inches beyond the last magnet - no end-gate bounce back.

There, my rotor is getting cut as we speak, and I am going to try that. Its there for all to see in the HJ track video, not the one with the hoop gate thing, but the flat track with a wooden toy car laden with magnets.

The vid shows the side view of the track, its also in his books, and it has the mags mounted on a wooden board, edges up like diamonds but overlapping slightly to short out the S fields.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Whatdya reckon Harv, Guys etc ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 12:46 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

evilscotsman wrote:

... something that was only recently confirmed by scientific (thesis) experimenters in electron microscopy that this is exactly the case. ...


I would be interested in reading that report.

evilscotsman wrote:

Whatdya reckon Harv, Guys etc ?


I have viewed the linear accelerator video and have read Beardens analysis of it. Both of which show that magnetic fields can be manipulated to convert their stored energy into kinetic energy. Now if we could positively identify and scale the process at which that occurs, then we will have what everyone is searching for.

From my research I have ascertained that this energy release is closely linked to time, mass and motion - all three of which are meaninless without reference. We often exchange these terms with simplicity. Driving your car faster is called "making up time". "With the speed of that pitch the catcher is feeling an impact in his glove equivalent to catching X Lbs of solid lead falling from a 3 story building." "Time stands still for the geosynchronous satellite as it never moves from it's locked position over the earth"

When we interplay the mass responsible for a magnetic field with relative motion for a given period of time we observe interesting results. But of particular interest is the actions of accelerating and decelerating, because it is these differentials that result in energy conversions. Steady state motion is a condition of equilibrium where energy is no longer converted from one form to another. Therefore, there must be continuous fluctuations of motion for a mass over time. A mass that is at an equilibrium motion is also at an equilbrium energy.

Consider the lunar orbit. Using the center of the earth as a reference we find that it is at equilibrium with a constant motion. We really can't expect to find any major energy exchanges from this consistent velocity. However, when we use the Sun as a reference we discover that the moon is accelerating and decelerating in it's composite solar orbit and maps out a somewhat sinusoidal path along the way. From this, we can expect energy conversions. Also, the surface of the earth experiences differentials relative to these two bodies, the sun and the moon. So we find that kinetic energy does in fact exist in the form of tidal flow due to these various differentials of relative motion of mass over time.

We can reduce this scenario to the atom and compare the nucleus, the electron and the positrino* to these same events. The electron orbits the nucleus and the positrino orbits the electron. "Charge" curvatures in space-time primarily govern the bonding and orbital paths with harmonic gravitational curvatures playing a minor role. In some unique situations the orbital may even be an electron/positron pair spinning like two dancers with coupled hands as they encircle the entire floor, but in this case they orbit the nucleus together. When we force an engery exchange that results in slower tighter orbits or vice versa, electrons will move from one orbital position to another. When they increase orbital diameter, they absorb energy and when they decrease orbital diameter they release energy. Collisions between positrinos and electrons result in a reduction of electron energy and mass. Collisions between postirons and electrons results in a balanced conversion of both masses into pure gamma radiation. It is my opinion that electrons, positrons, negatrinos, positrinos and neutrinos can all come in a wide range of sizes but that the harmonic relationships of the environment they live in makes such short lived - so the abundance we find are those that are harmonious with their environment.

When we are able to disrupt the balanced harmony of positrino bound atoms, it is possible to illicit an energy discharge or absorption depending on the circumstances by forcing collisions.

*A positrino is a particle I envisage as having the same mass as a neutrino but with a fractional postive charge. Conversely, a negatrino would have a fractional negative charge.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 5:07 am PostPost subject:
Magluvin
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 25 Nov 2008
Posts: 499
Location: USA

Reply with quote

TK seems to have opened a "can of strings" with this story. And it seems people are seeing strings everywhere. Just whats being said. Havnt gone through to look for any.

I have looked at the spin stuff and I dont have yay or nay to say on that.
You have all seen the gif anim of the motor showing the red and blue atraction/repultion lines right? I look at that explanation, and cant make any comparisons with it to being concerned with the spins. Like its 2 separate explanations.

If you notice on the pic of HJs motor on popsci cover, the depiction seems to show some high expectations of torque, considering that pulley ratio to the generator.

Also I wanted to make a correction to my earlier post. Third paragraph, second never ending sentence...

" The taller the stator is from the rotor surface, or better yet, the further the N pole of the rotor magnet is from its S pole, that south pole angle relationship with the stators sharp edge pole, will be diminished compared to a shallow rotor magnet, thus reducing the forces we are trying to take advantage of."

The first part got fouled up, maybe an edit mishap, or a finger fart.
it was meant to say....

" The taller the [rotor magnet] is from the rotor surface, or better yet, the further the N pole of the rotor magnet is from its S pole, that south pole angle relationship with the stators sharp edge pole, will be diminished compared to a shallow rotor magnet, thus reducing the forces we are trying to take advantage of."

Magluvin
_________________
I always think of it like an electric motor, ya gota have pole switching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 8:32 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Looked for strings and monofiliment line - didn't see any.

Haven't seen the gif with red and blue lines.

Understand Magluvin's point regarding a stonehenge model with channel magnets.

Have been doing some experiments with various configurations to explore the entry collapse and exit push. Using ferromagnetic Pizza Tins for now, don't have to glue the magnets and the tins act like a permeabilty plate. But there is some eddy drag with them. Have been hanging the magnets over the edge Wink Need horseshoe stators, aluminum plate and square-bar ceramics. Worked my old bearings a bit with graphite and the improvement was significant. Need to chart entry and exit forces. Not used to doing all this stuff myself, usually have an assistant. Not much ambition for this, but will stick with it a while.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 8:51 pm PostPost subject:
evilscotsman
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 56
Location: United Kingdom

Reply with quote

I'm getting an aluminium disc cut at our engineering suppliers, 5mm thick and 450mm diameter (18" in US language Wink and I have the curved DC motor mags as stators, they are exactly the right shape and spacing. Just rip them out of some old cordless drills if you can get them at boot (garage) sales etc, usually don't work anyway! Hacksaw the casing down the sides to split it in 2 halves and then squeeze the metal curved part (the bit away form the mags) and the magnets pop off as the metal becomes straight.

Ceramic bar magnets are cheap, the sharper and squarer the better. If you were lucky enough to have a Gauss meter, you could pinpoint the strongest or highest field spots on each magnet, and adjust the placement accordingly, maybe even shifting them out or in to have to match the fields up in placement and strength.

Oddly though, he (mylow) says there's no symmetry, as all magnets are different, but then by adjusting them to gaps that match their relative strength then you are working towards symmetry by levelling out those differences, aren't you?

The base mount i am using is a broken shaft encoder "motor" from a woodcutting machine! It has an excellent, high quality twin bearing with no side float or end-play but needs washing out of grease. but has a nice alloy mount that's perfect and looks actually like the one mylow used on the original disc.

If he did use fishing line, I would be surprised. It is plausible though, just shows how TK/AL came up with a way of faking rotation nearly invisibly, but the video where Mylow just finished placing 2 mags on the blank disc and lets it go in the stator field, then it begins an accurate pendulum type swinging motion back and forth, through the stator field, hitting the same spots every time till he stops it with his hand after quite a while - a stepper motor couldn't do that unless it was computer controlled (or pic micro etc) to run forwards and backwards and exact amount each time, and a human puppeteer couldn't do that either I don't think, what with line slippage and tension to deal with.

I for one am sure this is the closest thing to what we seek than anything so far, and is backed up by HJ's original empirical research, even if he was a little overconfident (!) with his motor design, which was just an artists image after all. He comes from a simpler time in our history where they still worked towards global ideals, but there probably seemed loads of time to achieve it, and they were forging a path for others to follow.

Time - something we know now, that we don't have.

As for the electron microscopy article Harvey, it was in popular scientist website or something, but here's a different page on the same article, not so magnet research focused but explains the same findings that an electron spins in a vortex inside a magnet and can be directed, controlled and appear at known points as it keeps the same orbital path every time!

http://www.physorg.com/news157889543.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 10:29 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Evilscotsman wrote:

... Oddly though, he (mylow) says there's no symmetry, as all magnets are different, but then by adjusting them to gaps that match their relative strength then you are working towards symmetry by levelling out those differences, aren't you? ...


But then the question becomes: "Is it symmetrical for amplitude or time?" Since we know it cannot be both. If the gaps adjust the amplitude by squeezing the flux up in the gap, then the distance between each peak will be varied. Therefore the time interval between each will be asymmetrical. The force then is reasonably symmetrical, but the timing is not. Even gaps would cause the inverse.

Naturally, we can imagine a pair of magnets so strong, that the gap is greater than the stator magnets overall dimensions and the peak of the flux is no longer sharply identified, but rounded and ineffective. Conversely, we can imagine a pair so weak that the gap is but a small fraction of a millimeter, and althogh the flux is sharp, its amplitude is much too low to be effective. Therefore, somewhere in between is a sweet spot where the flux is accurately focused sharply and the force is adequate to not only allow entrance to the gate (the max value), but also provideds sufficient force to push the disc 360 from the exit point (the minimum value). It is no easy dance to be sure, but Mylow seems to be able to find it.

Evilscotsman wrote:

... a stepper motor couldn't do that ...


TK imagines that there is a one way clutch on the motor that only pulls it in one direction like his version.

I looked at the bouncing, and I think it was degrading over time, but it was hard to tell in the brief amount of time shown.


Have we heard anything from Sterling regarding the recent disappearance?

Neutral
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 11:09 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Just read the article about the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory project that Jake Koralek, a member of Joseph Orenstein's laboratory group was involved in. Jake is quoted in the article, but clearly Joseph and Chris were instrumental in initiating the project and it moved forward with the aid of several other persons mentioned in the article.

It is noteworthy here that the normal state of electrons in this case is random. The persistent helix is induced by laser interference. So we don't observe this helix naturally. It is also noteworthy to distinquish between a helix and a vortex.

Thank you for the link - I am still searching for validation of the magnetic vortex in mainstream science. I don't know the exact figures, but I believe more than half of all major breakthroughs that have impacted global society have been discovered by unaccredited scientists. So either will work for me, main stream validation or repeatable test of confirmation by anyone. I don't trust HJ's apparatus, and knowing what I think I know about how magnetic fields are formed leads me to believe the vortex is a product of measurement not of magnetic function. My fear is that HJ has only mapped the catenoid of the field and a small error in axial alignment has lead to a perceived vortex because of the minute variance of force values associated with that alignment. Simply put, we need more data.

Cheers

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 11:58 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:

Thank you for the link - I am still searching for validation of the magnetic vortex in mainstream science.


Now I'm no math wiz, but it seems to me there are some 140 year old equations that have reliably described electomagnetic behavior and which are based on the concept of vortical magnetic fields.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 8:25 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

OC wrote:

... there are some 140 year old equations that have reliably described electomagnetic behavior ...


I find it odd then, that in 1897 when J.J. Thomson correctly identified the electron in his cathode ray experiments, that he used an electric field and a magnetic B field to calibrate the path of the electron and determine that it had a consistent velocity. If the B field were vortical, then the electron path would follow the curvature of the vortex, but instead the electron followed a straight path.

Experiments since then have led to the use of Hemholtz Coils to ensure a truly uniform B field for these experiments. And the Lorentz force is well known such that we are certain that any particle with a charge of zero will pass through the B field unfazed. Therefore, one must consider what the B field is comprised of and: how exactly does it interact with its environment? We find that the Lorentz Force is perpendicular to the B field and the trajectory of the charged particle. We also find that the force is dependant on the polarity of the charged particle. We do not find the magnetic field applying a force that would be in keeping with a rotating vortex, unless we imagine that there are some sort of particles being thrown out of the vortex that push against the electrons as they pass through. But then, why would Ions be pulled into the center of the vortex? And then, how would we explain the reversal of the Lorentz force outside of the catenoid region? A wrap around vortex would have the same direction inside the catenoid as it does outside because of the fold over. But the field vector is inverted as it passes along the equitorial line toward the opposite pole. So a charged particle on a trajectory toward the equatorial line will curve in the opposite direction as a charged particle passing through the catenoid regions. If the Lorentz force was caused by a vortex, this wouldn't occur.

Now, most experiments don't aim particles at magnetic sources, but perhapse a few of them should. Since phospor emits light when struck with electrons, we could place a strong magnet in a vacuum chamber and fill the chamber with a small quantity of phosphor gas and the balance of nitrogen under reduced atomsophere. By bombarding the chamber with a scanning beam and digitally recording the impacts we could get a very accurate 3D map of a magnetic field based on the beam curvatures. Now, the question we need to ask, is why this information is locked away in my head instead of being applied in scientific research. Surely others have thought of doing such an experiment before I thought of it in 1975.

There are reasons why certain projects never get funding.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 4:58 pm PostPost subject:
evilscotsman
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 56
Location: United Kingdom

Reply with quote

I did think about using a laser of a single polarisiation and scanning across the magnet in the same way you say, but using polarised glass to see only the photons which get twisted by the mag field....I think we think alike Harvey Smile

There was another article if I can find it since they won a prize for it, not sure if it was the Nobel or some other science award, but they were examining magnetic materials in data storage research and found they could set the spin of the electrons and use the spin to store a binary bit, hence huge storage from a small amount of material, and commented that the electron had a spiral orbit or vortex path as well as rotational spin I think, will try and find it from my history in i.e.

Spin up, or spin down, could be the reason for the poles of a magnet...

Here's a question too, maybe you can answer. Why, do the particles fly out so far from the magnet such that it affects a compass many inches away, and it is believed extend right out into space?

And, if they fly out so far from the magnet, do all materials have flying electrons that are so randomly orientated as to be a non magnetisable material yet still exhibiting this behaviour?

My thinking is that the electron is so small, and the object (!) it orbits, the nucleus, so small and contained inside the magnet, yet it swings out far away from its orbital centre, which in atomic terms is a massive distance and an extremely elliptic orbit.

Any thoughts?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 6:46 pm PostPost subject:
Droid
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Havertown Pa, USA

Reply with quote

@EvilScotsman

Now My Brain Hurts

try this one in your noodle

What Happens when the magnet is in motion, lets say towards the strongest field of emmision.
does it add a push to them? or does it ride like a wave over (thru) them
_________________
God Sends Me Many Signs. I'm Just Too Stupid To Realize It.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 10:28 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

@ES,

The 'particles' that propagate from one pole to the other are only imaginary virtual particles used to supply mathematical balance in a particle theory application to magnetism.

If the spin of an electron has such an impact, then what about the spin of the nucleus? How does the eliptic plane of the electron orbit play a part, if any? Do the electrons of a given atom all travel in the same direction? What could we expect if the didn't? Is it possible that two electrons travelling in opposite directions and having opposite eliptic plane angles could pass at right angles to each other, or perpendicular cross point? What type of spatial waves might this condition create?

Is our current atomic model too simplistic? Does it satisfy all known phenomenon?

Cheers,

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 10:37 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

@ Droid,

This was the subject matter of my contemplations surrounding the doppler shift of moving magnetic fields. Theoretically, doppler shift is a constituent of a moving frequency source relative to a reference. Since magnets are assumed to not be a source of any frequency, the moving field is not considered to be a candidate for doppler shift.

One of my arguments in this case is that the field projects a gradient whose value at any point relative to the source of the field can be taken as a differential of the values either side of it. When the field is in motion relative to an observer, there will be a compression of the field on the leading side and a decompression on the trailing side. The compression would manifest itself as a higher flux density while the opposite would be true of the decompression. Therefore, a passing magnetic field should appear stronger to the observer on approach than on retreat for the same distance. Although my points are valid, science is yet to come to the realization that they are true. I am patient in this regard.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 20, 2009 10:44 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
Therefore, a passing magnetic field should appear stronger to the observer on approach than on retreat for the same distance.


Results of your pendulum experiment don't seem to agree with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 21, 2009 12:27 am PostPost subject:
Droid
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Havertown Pa, USA

Reply with quote

@Harvey
Ahhh so We must now consider an observation made by Einstien.
a person standing by the side of a train track will hear the sound of an approaching train at different frequencies as the train comes toward, passes by and moves away. All these different frequencies were generatated by a single source that remained steady( unchanged to themselves) through out thier travel past the observer.
the energy at the souce, constant
at the obsever, maybe not
lets take the whipmag as a magnetic reference
turn the whipmag rotor slowly and any mounted stator will follow.
spin it to fast and they sit there.
what changed?
the stators are the person on the side of the tracks
the rotor the train
ummm same train of thought here?
_________________
God Sends Me Many Signs. I'm Just Too Stupid To Realize It.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 21, 2009 12:16 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

I think you are mixing magnaphores Mr. Green

The thing that changes is the time interval present for applying a force to a mass.

The force remains the same, the mass remains the same, but how long the force pushes on the mass becomes reduced. Since work is defined as a force applied to a mass for a given distance, we need to consider how that occurs. In order to move a mass, we must first change its speed from zero to some other value. A simplified equation would be F = ma. Or to put it differently, a = F/m. So we know, that if we apply a force to a mass, we will get an acceleration. But that takes time.

Because the force that intends to move the stator is only present for a short period of time, it does not have sufficient time to accelerate it. It will start to move, but then the force is gone and it simply rocks back and forth a bit. The magnetic fields will actually create a shear line between themselves and not even try to connect if the speed is fast enough.

If this is gibberish, I'm half aleesp Shocked

G'nite - or morining or whatever month this is.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 26, 2009 3:07 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Recently, a Lenz effect / eddy current asymmetry was reported by lumen over at OU.com. It has been replicated by several experimenters, including TinselKoala. The effect is noticable when a magnet is sliding across the surface of a conducting material like aluminum or copper.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7490.0

I'm posting tis here just to make everyone aware of the anomaly and see if there are any ideas what's happening and why.

Also, is it possible this effect could actually be used to provide the required asymmetry to drive a MyLow-like motor?

If desired, we could start another thread on this topic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 26, 2009 8:05 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

I believe the Mylow motor has a force asymmetry related to the field shape and and distribution. The opposing force of like poles approaching is reactive over a longer distance but has a lower force which collapses completely as the magnets pass each other as long as there is a train of like poles trailing it. Each of these magnets in the train experience a short strong repulsive force just as they pass the stators. The last magnet in the train has a much stronger reaction then those preceeding it as if the force was redistributed to the end. This results in a softer in pressure over a greater distance, which is the loss mechanism, and a sharper out pressure over a smaller distance which is the gain mechnism.

When we add the momentum of the disc to the equation we find that this results in a productive asymmetry. The smaller force applied to the momentum over a longer period is insufficent to reduce the momentum while the greater force applied for a sharp burst does demonstrate an accelertation. The separation between these two events (the bottom line) is extremely small. In most cases, scientifically, we would almost discount it as not even occuring and would round our figures to show a balance between the loss and the gain where the time/distance portion of the acceleration (+/-) are traded for force.

WRT the strange eddy currents; all materials have dipoles. How they are oriented is one thing, and how they move when embedded in a magnetic field is another. Some materials may be able to rotate these dipoles one way easily, while the other way they have some resistance. In TK's demonstration, we only saw 4 surfaces demonstrated. Truly, it needs to be done on all six surfaces of equal size and with mulitple tests per surface. I think we will find a relationship where two of the surfaces will display opposite results.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm PostPost subject:
Mr.Entropy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Posts: 67
Location: Canada

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7490.0

I'm posting tis here just to make everyone aware of the anomaly and see if there are any ideas what's happening and why.

This effect is pretty neat. I was able to replicate it using some disc magnets and brass bar stock.

I think the most likely explanation is an asymmetry in the magnetization of the magnets, with the flux lines being more concentrated on one pole surface than the other.

It's odd, though, that it always seems to be the north pole that sticks best. Has everybody found that? It would cast doubt on my theory.

In the process of labelling the poles on my magnets, I found that a stack of them (to separate the poles) on a string makes a surprisingly strong compass, so I tried it in various directions. That didn't make any difference as to which side was stickiest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 27, 2009 7:51 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

We know that dropping a large magnet on a large mass of aluminum (see this video for a demonstration). Therefore, we can see that the induced field counters the movement of the magnet. Similarly, dropping a magent down a copper tube will slow its fall.

So the question that comes to mind is: "Is the induced field always repulsive?"

Well, to check that, all we would need to do is invert the test. Place the magnet under the material and allow it to drop. It should hesitate just as it leaves the surface. So there is an action that opposes change and therefore acts as a conservation mechanism.

However, the materials themselves may have a speciific hysteresis relative to their cast or forged grain. These molecular and atomic orientations may give a specific propensity to a given polarity because of the atomic dipoles therein. If this is the case, the Cube Test I outlined above should answer the question.

Another explanation that should be evaluated would be the flux distribution differences between an induced attraction or an induced repulsion. TK's videos clearly show both occuring simultaneously where the leading edge is repelling and the trailing edge is attracting. This would be expected if we analyse the matter from the persepective of the field opposing motion. Now, if the 'stickyness' seems greater for one pole than the other, then perhaps the leading repulsion is pushing the magnet away far enough to reduce the trailing force because of the distance. In this case it can be something as simple as the radius of the edges being different on each side of the magnet (as this is where the highest concentration of flux resides).

Now the next question is whether or not this asymmetry can be exploited.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 28, 2009 2:02 am PostPost subject:
Mr.Entropy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Posts: 67
Location: Canada

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
So the question that comes to mind is: "Is the induced field always repulsive?"

There are multiple current loops. The induced field opposes the change in the applied field, so... Around the leading edge of the falling magnet, where the applied field is increasing, the induced field is repulsive. Around the trailing edge, where the applied field is decreasing, the induced field is attractive.

ETA: and everywhere else, it's complicated Smile I have no idea why the magnet actually clings to the _underside_ of a ramp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:23 pm PostPost subject:
evilscotsman
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 56
Location: United Kingdom

Reply with quote

If it was repulsive as it seems to be when the magnet is falling toward the aluminium, then the magnet should fall faster from under the plate, but it still slows down. The induced magnetism works against gravity in 2 different directions? Are they mutually exclusive as well? Surely that does not strictly follow the CoE or newtons laws of motion since the two actions are in the same direction with regard to gravity, opposite with reference to the plate, but do not produce the same direction of the forces developed....and so are non-conservative? Maybe equal, but definately not opposite to the direction of the "applied" force (gravities pull on the falling magnet) on both sides....

So the aluminium "drag" - repels the moving "rotor" for want of a better term, then attracts it when it passes - that is in direct contravention of the CoE and Newtons third law of motion is it not? - no equal and opposite reaction from the "drag" - which should always attract or always repel, not choose one then the other.

Why and how is the information changing in a binary fashion, that is passed between the field of the PM and the particles of the aluminium?

Here's a wee experiment for anyone who can try it, take a long-ish magnet, dropped axially toward the aluminium, in the horizontal axis, and the falling test, again dropped from longwise across the plate, both poles presented, does it act the same way at both poles with equal intensity - or does the S pole fall faster than the N for example, to show the aluminium repels the S pole and attracts the N pole, or are the reactions exactly the same? If they are the same, that would make the puzzle even weirder.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:41 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

As Mr. Entropy has pointed out, the 'reaction' is always opposite to the 'action'. So if the magnet is moving toward the aluminum the induced field (the reaction) is repulsion and inversely, if the magnet is moving away, then the induced field is in attraction. This also explains his ETA comment. Because the magnet is neither moving away nor toward the Aluminum, it remains stuck. If it were to move away, it would be attracted back. Now we have arrived at understanding the field ratios. Gravity is weak by comparison to magnetism, so we should not be surprised to find the magnet over powering it. Now for the details.

The induced field only exists during a change in flux density across a given atom in the material. If the flux density does not change, even if the magnet is moving, no induced field will exist. Because the flux density boundaries are usually following a curved line, density changes nearly always exist with a moving magnet. However, the magnitude of those changes may be small enough that gravitational effects have a much larger role in the activity. When the induced field succeeds in halting the action entirely, and movement ceases, the induced field collapses. Now this is an interesting thing, because that induced field is a form of stored energy that must find a home outside the now nonexistent field. Often, what occurs in this case is a role reversal where the induced field energy is added to the kinetic energy of the moving magnet, in essence opposing the full halt. This oscillation can bounce back and forth at extremely high rates until residual heating drains all the energy from the process. Realistically we observe the effect as simply slowing down the movement because the ratios between the induced force and the gravitational force finds equilibrium at that rate of change for the flux density.

So why do we see a gap forming on the falling edge? This has to do with the force vectors involved. Again, we must evaluate the flux density curvature to understand how the density is changing over time. The force vector depend on the density change vector which may be radically different from the propagation vector. Consequently, we can see an outward force causing a separation do to the curvature of the flux. It is reasonable to conclude that the opposite will be true on the trailing edge if the flux curvature is symmetrical.

Now, if we replace the aluminum with a ferromagnetic metal, say stainless steel, what will the effects be?

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | WhipMag Discussion/Development
View previous topic
View next topic
Display posts from previous:   




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum