top

Question for Alsetalokin

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

Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 am PostPost subject: Question for Alsetalokin
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Al,

I raised some questions about the two distinct acceleration phases in your WhipMag demonstration. Now, it may be clear to you that reduced friction or drag is the reason. It's not clear to me unless we can identify a source for the force.

Please reread my posts in the "Now that's just silly" thread. Think about what I was saying. Ask yourself those questions and see if you can honestly rationalize the device's behavior to yourself.

I think there are forces at play here that we don't fully understand. And it's a lot more than friction. I'd still like to see a scientific study on the matter.

So my question requires only a simple yes/no response. Can you completely account for the behavior?

OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:59 pm PostPost subject:
billgates
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 27 Jan 2008
Posts: 41

Reply with quote

@Al
I add a straight question: do you supply external electric or magnetic energy to make your MPMM run? Confused

If you answer no, are you so kind to tell us the power of your magic magnets to help replications?

Thank you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

@billgates,
Al tried to help determine 'the power of' his 'magic magnets'. It was suggested early on that he place two of them in a clear vertical tube with like poles facing. He then measured the reslulting gap between them.

This test revealed by comparison that the strength of his rotor magnets was between N35 and N38. As I recall they were supplied in a sample pack.

Also, somewhere there is mention that the stator magnets needed to be of greater strength than the rotor magnets. So IIRC they are N42's.

Hope that helps.
Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:47 pm PostPost subject:
MADPROF
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Posts: 545

Reply with quote

@Al

A question if I may.

Your second trash can video shows a contact area on your base which looks to match the bottom of the rotor, does the rotor need to touch the base, or is there a small air gap? Rolling Eyes
_________________
"simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun Apr 27, 2008 11:53 am PostPost subject:
billgates
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 27 Jan 2008
Posts: 41

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
@billgates,
Al tried to help determine 'the power of' his 'magic magnets'. It was suggested early on that he place two of them in a clear vertical tube with like poles facing. He then measured the reslulting gap between them.

This test revealed by comparison that the strength of his rotor magnets was between N35 and N38. As I recall they were supplied in a sample pack.

Also, somewhere there is mention that the stator magnets needed to be of greater strength than the rotor magnets. So IIRC they are N42's.

Hope that helps.
Cool


Thank you Harvey for your info on magnets!
I'd also like to know if possible the answer (just yes/no) from Al to my first question:
do you supply external electric or magnetic energy to make your MPMM run?

Thanks a lot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun Apr 27, 2008 3:33 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

I think his answer would be no.

Even if there is an exterior source of power (which he believes must be the case) he doesn't know (or at least didn't know when he started) what that was.

The problem we are faced with is that there is no way to validate his integrity other than by his posts. This is because 'alsetalokin' is a virtual person experimenting with a tangible test unit. So if you apply pure logic you are left with taking his word at face value and he has already stated that everything he has posted is true. Since everybody is imperfect, I think there is latitude there for misunderstandings and typos. But consider if you are skeptical of what he says. If so, you have no choice but to resolve your belief within yourself because nothing he can do or say will satisfy all skeptics. So he stands on his prior statements and data and that should be sufficient to those it really matters to.

Consider as well the term 'derivative works'. Even if the OCMPMM is open source, the derivative works that Al has produced as test beds are wholly owned by him. They are his designs 'derivative' of OC's concept. Any data Al has shared with us has been from his own doing and there is no obligation or requirement for him to prove or substatiate anything that has to do with the video that Yirkha put on You-Tube. If Al was the bad guy some have tried to make him out to be, he could have easily demanded Yirkha to remove it and pressed copyrights with You-Tube to enforce it. He could have then corresponded exclusively with OC privately and developed his own derivative work. But instead, he graciously stepped up and performed tests at the bequest of us all and at the expense of his own time and sleep.

I think his character, virtual or not, is manifest.
(if any of this seems a bit off, it may be because I forgot to sleep last night)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 1:37 am PostPost subject:
maryyugo
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 114

Reply with quote

"Alsetalokin" is not writing in the manner that one would expect from a "normal" person experimenting with magnets as a hobby. I've read many such reports and seen many such videos and no legitimate experimenters are as unreachable, evasive, ambigous, and generally unclear and slippery as this person has been. You can draw your own conclusions from that and, of course, from the evidence for COE.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 4:30 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

maryyugo wrote:
"Alsetalokin" is not writing in the manner that one would expect from a "normal" person experimenting with magnets as a hobby. I've read many such reports and seen many such videos and no legitimate experimenters are as unreachable, evasive, ambiguous, and generally unclear and slippery as this person has been. You can draw your own conclusions from that and, of course, from the evidence for COE.


Hi Mary, how have you been?
I love that you put normal in quotes. Personally my experience with persons of abstract thinking has shown me they are beyond the norm. Even Mensa touts the abnormal percentile as some type of prestige. Fact is, we don't know how 'normal' people react to experimenting with magnets because the larger percentile simply put them aside after a few hours of exposure regardless of IQ or predisposition. Quite simply, most 'normal' persons get bored of it and fail to accomplish anything.

I also find the qualifier 'legitimate' interesting. How do you differentiate between experimenters that are legitimate and experimenters that are not? My honest experience with most inventors is they are very closed lipped. Even simple engineers are faced with NDAís and ulterior motives the illicit secrecy. Some are even contractually bound to their employers regarding anything they think of 24 hours a day that may result in profit or derivative works. So I find your touchstone to be less Ďnormalí than reality.

As far as COE any Scientist worth his parchment knows there is undiscovered energy and matter yet to be documented. Ongoing research continues is all fields of energy and definitive answers are yet to found for a wide variety of observed effects. Iím still surprised by widespread misunderstanding surrounding Faradayís Axial Field Paradox. With such misunderstandings with regards to the true nature of magnetism still present it is obvious to me that COE needs to take into account that magnetism is a very open system whose usable maximum distance is still undetermined. This means if you create a field and allow it to collapse, you donít have a clue what it might drag back with it.

But now, thatís just my own conclusion that Iíve drawn from the matter.

Best Regards,
Harvey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:12 pm PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
..... With such misunderstandings with regards to the true nature of magnetism still present it is obvious to me that COE needs to take into account that magnetism is a very open system whose usable maximum distance is still undetermined. This means if you create a field and allow it to collapse, you donít have a clue what it might drag back with it.

@Harvey,

We know that permanent magnets eventually "wear out" as the domains lose alignment. Is AGW (@high RPM) causing the magnets to wear out more quickly, and is energy being extracted from the magnets in this scenario?

.. Q: Al's longest run was 7 hours, and is it possible that his rotor stopped due to a decrease in magnetic field strength? Do we know the status of Al's magnets following an extended run, and is Al "expending" magnets under AGW conditions?

Cheers Smile
Yada..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:56 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:

We know that permanent magnets eventually "wear out" as the domains lose alignment. Is AGW (@high RPM) causing the magnets to wear out more quickly, and is energy being extracted from the magnets in this scenario?


I don't believe the magnets in Al's device ever experience any repulsive fields greater than Hc, so the magnets should not degrade except due to vibration, heat, age, or an external degaussing field.

Yadaraf wrote:

.. Q: Al's longest run was 7 hours, and is it possible that his rotor stopped due to a decrease in magnetic field strength? Do we know the status of Al's magnets following an extended run, and is Al "expending" magnets under AGW conditions?


The 7-hour run did not stop on its own, it was manually stopped by Al. His device was always capable of starting back up again almost immediately after coming to a stop. I don't believe there have been any indications of magnet deterioration. But, to be absolutely certain, they should be carefully measured via nondestructive means.

OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 8:05 pm PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:

I don't believe the magnets in Al's device ever experience any repulsive fields greater than Hc, so the magnets should not degrade except due to vibration, heat, age, or an external degaussing field.

@OC

Thanks. I'm curious why you constrain your argument to repulsive fields.

..Q: Don't magnets were out faster when subjected to attractive fields?

Cheers Smile
Yada..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 8:33 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:

Thanks. I'm curious why you constrain your argument to repulsive fields.

..Q: Don't magnets were out faster when subjected to attractive fields?


Nope. Attractive fields will actually extend a magnet's life. Have you ever heard of using a "keeper"?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:45 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:
Harvey wrote:
..... With such misunderstandings with regards to the true nature of magnetism still present it is obvious to me that COE needs to take into account that magnetism is a very open system whose usable maximum distance is still undetermined. This means if you create a field and allow it to collapse, you donít have a clue what it might drag back with it.

@Harvey,

We know that permanent magnets eventually "wear out" as the domains lose alignment. Is AGW (@high RPM) causing the magnets to wear out more quickly, and is energy being extracted from the magnets in this scenario?

.. Q: Al's longest run was 7 hours, and is it possible that his rotor stopped due to a decrease in magnetic field strength? Do we know the status of Al's magnets following an extended run, and is Al "expending" magnets under AGW conditions?

Cheers Smile
Yada..


OC stated it almost exactly as I would have Very Happy

I would add as well that in AGW mode the stator / rotor interaction is both repulsive and attractive simulatneously. The only place we have asymmetrical opposition is in the rotor magnet layout where all magnets are aligned in opposition. But again, its insufficient to result in domain disalignment in this material.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:07 am PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

@OC, Harvey

The longest run has been reported to be 7 hrs (recently confirmend by Al). Granted Al stopped the device, but his reason was not very clear, and perhaps he saw that the device was winding down.

.. Q: If you had such a device, would you not let it run for days, or until it stopped by itself? Why stop it? (Put it in a closet if you don't like the noise.)

As you can see, I'm perplexed by the 7 hrs time limit and believe there is more to it, which is why I'm suggesting that the magnets lose strength. If you got up at 9AM and started the device, you could easily let it run until bedtime -- 12 hours or so. Also, Al is fixated with consuming 17000 Joules.

.. Al on decaying magnets: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3268#3268

.. Al on preconceptions: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3080#3080

Is 17000 Joules what one can extract from the magnet(s)? Didn't Al say that when he showed the device to a co-worker, the co-worker said something like "of course, what else did you suspect would happen."

.. Q: Anyone know how much energy is stored in the Whipmag magnets?


Cheers Smile
Yada..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:33 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:
@OC, Harvey

The longest run has been reported to be 7 hrs (recently confirmend by Al). Granted Al stopped the device, but his reason was not very clear, and perhaps he saw that the device was winding down.

.. Q: If you had such a device, would you not let it run for days, or until it stopped by itself? Why stop it? (Put it in a closet if you don't like the noise.)

As you can see, I'm perplexed by the 7 hrs time limit and believe there is more to it, which is why I'm suggesting that the magnets lose strength. If you got up at 9AM and started the device, you could easily let it run until bedtime -- 12 hours or so. Also, Al is fixated with consuming 17000 Joules.

.. Al on decaying magnets: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3268#3268

.. Al on preconceptions: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3080#3080

Is 17000 Joules what one can extract from the magnet(s)? Didn't Al say that when he showed the device to a co-worker, the co-worker said something like "of course, what else did you suspect would happen."

.. Q: Anyone know how much energy is stored in the Whipmag magnets?


Cheers Smile
Yada..


IIRC Al touched the stator and caused a drop-out. There was some speculation that he had to go to work and didn't want to risk leaving it running, but quite frankly I think he was just moving the unit and FUBAR'd the 7 hour run.

The rotor and magnets contain ~8,925,768,000 Joules of energy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:02 am PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
Yadaraf wrote:
@OC, Harvey

The longest run has been reported to be 7 hrs (recently confirmend by Al). Granted Al stopped the device, but his reason was not very clear, and perhaps he saw that the device was winding down.

.. Q: If you had such a device, would you not let it run for days, or until it stopped by itself? Why stop it? (Put it in a closet if you don't like the noise.)

As you can see, I'm perplexed by the 7 hrs time limit and believe there is more to it, which is why I'm suggesting that the magnets lose strength. If you got up at 9AM and started the device, you could easily let it run until bedtime -- 12 hours or so. Also, Al is fixated with consuming 17000 Joules.

.. Al on decaying magnets: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3268#3268

.. Al on preconceptions: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3080#3080

Is 17000 Joules what one can extract from the magnet(s)? Didn't Al say that when he showed the device to a co-worker, the co-worker said something like "of course, what else did you suspect would happen."

.. Q: Anyone know how much energy is stored in the Whipmag magnets?


Cheers Smile
Yada..


IIRC Al touched the stator and caused a drop-out. There was some speculation that he had to go to work and didn't want to risk leaving it running, but quite frankly I think he was just moving the unit and FUBAR'd the 7 hour run.

The rotor and magnets contain ~8,925,768,000 Joules of energy.

@Harvey,

Thanks, mate. I suppose, however, that "useful" energy is another issue. For example, 1.5 V batteries are only useful to 1.25 V in many cases. Perhaps only the AGW stator loses "useful" strength -- say 10%. I think it would be hard to measure the loss.

Recall that Al cherry picked stator magnets. Perhaps he was unknowlingly selecting stator magnets that could accommodate the 10 % loss.

.. Q: I don't want to beat this into the ground, but why not run the device on another day for as long as possible? Isn't it common sense to evaluate such a characteristic -- especially in a system like this? Wouldn't you run the system for as long as possible?

Something does not add up. By now we should hear reports like "I attached a small generator to the rig" and not like "I haven't run it in a while." Very odd.

Lastly, if the primary stator does lose strength during the run, then it might be possible to dynamically move the stator closer to the rotor to compensate for the concomitant loss in strength (alleged loss).

Cheers Smile
Yada ..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:09 am PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:

I don't believe the magnets in Al's device ever experience any repulsive fields greater than Hc, so the magnets should not degrade except due to vibration, heat, age, or an external degaussing field.

@OC,

You agree that magnet strength degrades with vibration. OK.

.. Q: What about capturing or re-using the energy that is given off during vibration?

.. Q: The stators are noisy and vibrate a lot at 5000 RPM, so could AGW (high-speed co-rotation) be a pathway to capturing and re-cycling the energy "released" by stator vibration?

Ccheers Smile
Yada ..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:51 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:
overconfident wrote:

I don't believe the magnets in Al's device ever experience any repulsive fields greater than Hc, so the magnets should not degrade except due to vibration, heat, age, or an external degaussing field.

@OC,

You agree that magnet strength degrades with vibration. OK.

.. Q: What about capturing or re-using the energy that is given off during vibration?

.. Q: The stators are noisy and vibrate a lot at 5000 RPM, so could AGW (high-speed co-rotation) be a pathway to capturing and re-cycling the energy "released" by stator vibration?

Ccheers :)
Yada ..


Vibration is actually a mixed bag, not strictly a loss mechanism. Vibrating the magnet speeds up the magnetization/demagnetization process when in the presence of an applied field and has very little effect in the absence of an external field.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:24 am PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
Yadaraf wrote:

@OC,

You agree that magnet strength degrades with vibration. OK.

.. Q: What about capturing or re-using the energy that is given off during vibration?

.. Q: The stators are noisy and vibrate a lot at 5000 RPM, so could AGW (high-speed co-rotation) be a pathway to capturing and re-cycling the energy "released" by stator vibration?

Cheers Smile
Yada ..


Vibration is actually a mixed bag, not strictly a loss mechanism. Vibrating the magnet speeds up the magnetization/demagnetization process when in the presence of an applied field and has very little effect in the absence of an external field.

@OC,

Granted that we mostly understand what happens in "normal" fields, but how well do we understand the magnetization/demagnetization process in an AGW field?

.. Q: During AGW, which is a highly vibrational mode, is there a demagnetization process in which energy released from the stator is transferred to the rotor? Can we say for certain that this is not happening? (According to Al's calculations we need only account for 17000 Joules.)

What experiments could we run to prove or disprove the hypothesis?

Cheers Smile
Yada..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:10 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:
overconfident wrote:
Yadaraf wrote:

@OC,

You agree that magnet strength degrades with vibration. OK.

.. Q: What about capturing or re-using the energy that is given off during vibration?

.. Q: The stators are noisy and vibrate a lot at 5000 RPM, so could AGW (high-speed co-rotation) be a pathway to capturing and re-cycling the energy "released" by stator vibration?

Cheers :)
Yada ..


Vibration is actually a mixed bag, not strictly a loss mechanism. Vibrating the magnet speeds up the magnetization/demagnetization process when in the presence of an applied field and has very little effect in the absence of an external field.

@OC,

Granted that we mostly understand what happens in "normal" fields, but how well do we understand the magnetization/demagnetization process in an AGW field?

.. Q: During AGW, which is a highly vibrational mode, is there a demagnetization process in which energy released from the stator is transferred to the rotor? Can we say for certain that this is not happening? (According to Al's calculations we need only account for 17000 Joules.)

What experiments could we run to prove or disprove the hypothesis?

Cheers :)
Yada..


I'm not a physicist or engineer, just a dreamer. In my dream, the magnetic fields did not noticeably change in strength. The magnetic interactions appeared to be balanced.

I have no clue how to test for anything other than long-term degradation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:07 pm PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
Yadaraf wrote:

@OC,

Granted that we mostly understand what happens in "normal" fields, but how well do we understand the magnetization/demagnetization process in an AGW field?

.. Q: During AGW, which is a highly vibrational mode, is there a demagnetization process in which energy released from the stator is transferred to the rotor? Can we say for certain that this is not happening? (According to Al's calculations we need only account for 17000 Joules.)

What experiments could we run to prove or disprove the hypothesis?

Cheers Smile
Yada..


I'm not a physicist or engineer, just a dreamer. In my dream, the magnetic fields did not noticeably change in strength. The magnetic interactions appeared to be balanced.

I have no clue how to test for anything other than long-term degradation.

@OC, Harvey, HADRPOF

In the process of constructing a working hypothesis I've given more thought to the following items:
..1. Requirement for stator magnets to be stronger than rotor magnets
..2. Selection process that identifies "magic" stator magnets.
..3. Significance of vibration.

I'd like to hear your feedback on the following hypothesis: Cool

"Al selected stator magnets that had a propensity to release energy under highly vibratory conditions produced by high speed co-rotation (AGW) and other system resonances. Because the stator magnet(s) were stronger than the rotor magnets, the difference in potential provided a pathway for the transference of energy through the AGW field from the stator(s) to the rotor, thus causing the rotor to accelerate and sustain rotation."

Note that I am not suggesting that Al was aware of the above when he identified the "magic" stator magnets. Please feel free to modify the above text.

Cheers Smile
Yada..

EDIT: added to hypothesis


Last edited by Yadaraf on Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:33 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:28 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:

@OC, Harvey, HADRPOF

I'd like to hear your feedback on the following hypothesis: 8)

"Al selected stator magnets that had a propensity to release energy under highly vibratory conditions produced by high speed co-rotation (AGW) and other system resonances. Because the stator magnet(s) were stonger than the rotor magnets, the difference in potential provided a pathway for stator energy to transfer to the rotor, thus causing it to accelerate and sustain rotation."


Again, not the way I see it. Not saying you are wrong, but I see this as primarily a balancing act between rotational inertia and the simultaneous combination of magnetic attraction AND repulsion. Look at the force vectors in my early illustration:

http://www.ospmm.org/whipmag/oc/OC13Frame1.gif

I see things pretty much the same way with the AGW stator, but with much more delicate balance.

In most conventional applications, one pole acts to our benefit and the opposite pole to our detriment. The configuration I proposed allows us to leverage both poles to our benefit, at least for a sufficient portion of the time to show an overall gain.

OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 8:04 pm PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
Yadaraf wrote:

@OC, Harvey, HADRPOF

I'd like to hear your feedback on the following hypothesis: Cool

"Al selected stator magnets that had a propensity to release energy under highly vibratory conditions produced by high speed co-rotation (AGW) and other system resonances. Because the stator magnet(s) were stonger than the rotor magnets, the difference in potential provided a pathway for stator energy to transfer to the rotor, thus causing it to accelerate and sustain rotation."


Again, not the way I see it. Not saying you are wrong, but I see this as primarily a balancing act between rotational inertia and the simultaneous combination of magnetic attraction AND repulsion. Look at the force vectors in my early illustration:

http://www.ospmm.org/whipmag/oc/OC13Frame1.gif

I see things pretty much the same way with the AGW stator, but with much more delicate balance.

In most conventional applications, one pole acts to our benefit and the opposite pole to our detriment. The configuration I proposed allows us to leverage both poles to our benefit, at least for a sufficient portion of the time to show an overall gain.

OC

@OC,

Thanks for the review. I don't see how your model accounts for the additional energy needed to accelerate and sustain the rotor. Question

Revised hypothesis:

"Al selected stator magnets that had a propensity to release energy under highly vibratory conditions produced by high speed co-rotation (AGW) and other system resonances. Because the stator magnet(s) were stonger than the rotor magnets, the difference in potential provided a pathway for the transferance of energy through the AGW field from the stator(s) to the rotor, thus causing the rotor to accelerate and sustain rotation."

Cheers Smile
Yada ..
_________________
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (Clarke's law)
Changing the world, one magnet at a time. (Yada)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:42 pm PostPost subject:
MADPROF
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Posts: 545

Reply with quote

@Yada

Feedback Hmmmmmmmm. Well I don't know anything like OC and Harvey (can't wait for Harveys reply, this Guy operates on so many levels) Cool

What I can tell you form my own tests is:

I have 10 stator mags. ALL 10 ACHIVE A.G.W in the same stator mount and bearing, I also turned them over and re-fitted them to the stator, again all got A.G.W.

Just because Al didn't want to send the magnets doesn't mean they have any MAGIC in them, more like he doesn't want a working whipmag being picked off by some toe-rag in the postal system.

I found that A.G.W is down to the stator BEARINGS. I powered mine for 1Hr at about 12,000 R.P.M (stator speed). Stopped it then tried manual A.G.W and there was no problem. Then I applied a small amount of light weight oil and tried again, It didn't want to know.

Al loves it when we get it so wrong, magic magnets my arse, This is about movements and not allowing fields to balance.

If you want Magic magnets, set to with a angle grinder and remove magnetic material. I found out this guys name Howard Johnson, he knew how to F~~~ with magnets.

TTFN Smile
_________________
"simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:29 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:

Revised hypothesis:

"Al selected stator magnets that had a propensity to release energy under highly vibratory conditions produced by high speed co-rotation (AGW) and other system resonances. Because the stator magnet(s) were stonger than the rotor magnets, the difference in potential provided a pathway for the transferance of energy through the AGW field from the stator(s) to the rotor, thus causing the rotor to accelerate and sustain rotation."


In order to test your hypothesis we must establish the form of energy you believe is transferred and trace it back to the source. In this way we can determine how the energy reacts with the rotor as a force vector resulting in torque.

For instance, if you state the energy is electromagnetic then we look to Lenz's law for a torque response to the transfer.

Or, if we determine the energy is a transfer of spatial interaction we could look at Lorentz to see if it produces a boost of some sort.

Keep in mind that a vibratory exchange removes energy from the source of vibration. If you add energy to a crystal drinking glass by flicking it with your finger the glass will change shape and vibrate at its resonant frequency. But the resutling 'ringing' follows a definite attack/decay waveform. The energy is transferred from your muscles to the surrounding air by a sequence of interactions but the result is energy lost from the source.

I have a preconception that the laws of physics are never violated. They may be circumvented or rendered non-applicable but they are not violated. That being said, humanity is in its infancy when compared to the lifespan of this universe and we don't even know for certainty if our 'laws' are truly accurate. We went to the moon on Newtons 'Laws' only to discover they are left wanting.

Perhaps I should shed this preconception and accept the possibility that energy can change forms in magnetic fields in ways we have yet to discover. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:15 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

MADPROF wrote:
@Yada

Feedback Hmmmmmmmm. Well I don't know anything like OC and Harvey (can't wait for Harveys reply, this Guy operates on so many levels) Cool

What I can tell you form my own tests is:

I have 10 stator mags. ALL 10 ACHIVE A.G.W in the same stator mount and bearing, I also turned them over and re-fitted them to the stator, again all got A.G.W.

Just because Al didn't want to send the magnets doesn't mean they have any MAGIC in them, more like he doesn't want a working whipmag being picked off by some toe-rag in the postal system.

I found that A.G.W is down to the stator BEARINGS. I powered mine for 1Hr at about 12,000 R.P.M (stator speed). Stopped it then tried manual A.G.W and there was no problem. Then I applied a small amount of light weight oil and tried again, It didn't want to know.

Al loves it when we get it so wrong, magic magnets my arse, This is about movements and not allowing fields to balance.

If you want Magic magnets, set to with a angle grinder and remove magnetic material. I found out this guys name Howard Johnson, he knew how to F~~~ with magnets.

TTFN Smile


I've posted this data elsewhere in the forum, but here it is again:

http://urad.net/forums/WhiPMag/Bearing%20Permutations.xls

This log represented several days of testing multiple configurations through a range of speeds. Please note that as exhaustive as these tests were they were incomplete and weathered a series of various failures and interactions. The tests were ended when the markings on the stator magnets were dissolved and I could no longer differentiate which was which.

In all my tests the rotor was brought up to speed using an air nozzle. Then the stator was energized using air until the beat frequency indicated sync had occured. At that point a reading was taken for the rotor RPM. The rotor was then accelerated slowly using the air nozzle until the stator would drop out. During rundown at 4/10 a clock reading was taken. At the end of the rundown another clock reading was taken. In some tests, the rundown was done seperately with an engaged stator. Only one stator was present in these tests.

Conclusion: Reduced friction and better balancing improves high speed sync. However, perfectly balanced rotor and stator are very difficult to get sync'd in AGW using this method.

Recommendation: Balance the rotor and stator perfectly - you should be able to spin them up to 10,000 RPM (each) with no noticable vibration. Select bearings to provide the least amount of friction. Lay the stator on its side (horizontal rotation axis)to acheive sync and then rotate into place (vertical rotation axis) for AGW mode. Test for dropout speed and acceleration. If we could get a 10 second flat line I'd be happy Very Happy

Cheers,
Harvey


Last edited by Harvey on Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:23 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:15 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:

@OC,

Thanks for the review. I don't see how your model accounts for the additional energy needed to accelerate and sustain the rotor. :?:


I don't see things quite the same way you (or most everyone else) does. I see a permanent magnet as a (almost) perpetual fountain of energy. If you stick a refrigerator magnet to the side of your fridge, how long will it stay there? Is its magnetic potential diminished in any way? Is its energy transferred to the fridge?

Same with 2 or 3 interacting permanent magnets that never exceed their design limits. They can keep interacting (almost) forever. Energy is not actually transferred from one to the other.

Each field provides a directional force with respect to another. Most often this is leveraged electromechanically, one pole at a time, as in a motor or generator. My goal was to devise a way where the forces from both poles simultaneously could provide positive force vectors that outnumber any negative force vectors. The characteristics I see that may achieve this are:

1) Magnets free to rotate to take greater advantage of attractive forces (spinning stators).
2) Resistance to rotation to allow repulsive forces to be better leveraged (latches).
3) Mechanism for reducing resistance when transitioning from near attraction into near repulsion (pivots).
4) Opposing magnets to interact with the rotating (stator) magnets (rotor magnet orientation).
5) An odd number of magnets on 1 side (stators) interacting with an even number of magnets on the other side (rotor) to add some asymmetry to the equation.

Like it or not, that's how I see it. Now there may be some vibration or wobble to help as well. But I don't see the magnets deteriorating because of it. And, although there might actually be a small energy exchange when in close quarters, I see it as balanced and it evens out in the long run.

Jusy my 2 pence,
OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:09 am PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

@OC
overconfident wrote:
I don't see things quite the same way you (or most everyone else) does. I see a permanent magnet as a (almost) perpetual fountain of energy. If you stick a refrigerator magnet to the side of your fridge, how long will it stay there? Is its magnetic potential diminished in any way? Is its energy transferred to the fridge?

As you know, manufacturing a neodymium magnet requires a lot of man-made energy: isostatic presses, field generators, etc. It makes sense (to me) that we can remove this same energy under controlled conditions (i.e. controlled demagnetization with energy scavenging). For that reason, I would disagree with you that magnets are perpetual fountains of energy. We simply have not discovered a mechanism for extracting the energy that was used to create the magnet.

On the other hand ... permanent magnets might behave like lenses that focus electromagnetic energy. In that respect, they simply manipulate available energy -- like glass lenses that focus light. Optical grade glass is better than plastic, and neodymium is better than ceramic.

As for the refrigerator magnet ... I have thought about this many times, but have not lived long enough to conduct an experiment. Does the magnet eventually fall -- say after 100 years? That depends on how much energy went into making the magnet. Rolling Eyes

overconfident wrote:

Same with 2 or 3 interacting permanent magnets that never exceed their design limits. They can keep interacting (almost) forever. Energy is not actually transferred from one to the other.

Each field provides a directional force with respect to another. Most often this is leveraged electromechanically, one pole at a time, as in a motor or generator. My goal was to devise a way where the forces from both poles simultaneously could provide positive force vectors that outnumber any negative force vectors. The characteristics I see that may achieve this are:

1) Magnets free to rotate to take greater advantage of attractive forces (spinning stators).
2) Resistance to rotation to allow repulsive forces to be better leveraged (latches).
3) Mechanism for reducing resistance when transitioning from near attraction into near repulsion (pivots).
4) Opposing magnets to interact with the rotating (stator) magnets (rotor magnet orientation).
5) An odd number of magnets on 1 side (stators) interacting with an even number of magnets on the other side (rotor) to add some asymmetry to the equation.

I would have to disagree with you regarding energy transference. If you stroke a iron nail with a magnet are you not transferring energy to the nail? How many nails can magnetize in this fashion before your magnetic source becomes useless? An infinite amount?

Cheers Smile
Yada..
_________________
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (Clarke's law)
Changing the world, one magnet at a time. (Yada)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:32 am PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
Yadaraf wrote:

Revised hypothesis:

"Al selected stator magnets that had a propensity to release energy under highly vibratory conditions produced by high speed co-rotation (AGW) and other system resonances. Because the stator magnet(s) were stonger than the rotor magnets, the difference in potential provided a pathway for the transferance of energy through the AGW field from the stator(s) to the rotor, thus causing the rotor to accelerate and sustain rotation."


In order to test your hypothesis we must establish the form of energy you believe is transferred and trace it back to the source. In this way we can determine how the energy reacts with the rotor as a force vector resulting in torque.

For instance, if you state the energy is electromagnetic then we look to Lenz's law for a torque response to the transfer.

Or, if we determine the energy is a transfer of spatial interaction we could look at Lorentz to see if it produces a boost of some sort.

Keep in mind that a vibratory exchange removes energy from the source of vibration. If you add energy to a crystal drinking glass by flicking it with your finger the glass will change shape and vibrate at its resonant frequency. But the resutling 'ringing' follows a definite attack/decay waveform. The energy is transferred from your muscles to the surrounding air by a sequence of interactions but the result is energy lost from the source.

I have a preconception that the laws of physics are never violated. They may be circumvented or rendered non-applicable but they are not violated. That being said, humanity is in its infancy when compared to the lifespan of this universe and we don't even know for certainty if our 'laws' are truly accurate. We went to the moon on Newtons 'Laws' only to discover they are left wanting.

Perhaps I should shed this preconception and accept the possibility that energy can change forms in magnetic fields in ways we have yet to discover. Smile

@Harvey,

A lot of man-made energy goes into creating a neodymium magnet. I'd like to extract that energy in a controlled fashion and reuse it. In other words, consider that a magnet is like a battery or spring: how do we recover the energy stored in the magnet? I think vibration and possible AGW are pathways to this extraction.

Also, I agree with you that humanity is in its infancy and we know very little about how the universe really works. We have spacecraft that are orbiting in ways that we don't understand using current gravitational theory. Paranormal investigators were recently called into Wright Patterson Air Force Base -- by the top brass -- to investigate manifestations of unusual energy, for which mainstream science had no explanation. Hyperdimensional energy?

Cheers Smile
Yada ..
_________________
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (Clarke's law)
Changing the world, one magnet at a time. (Yada)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:37 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Yadaraf wrote:
@OC
As for the refrigerator magnet ... I have thought about this many times, but have not lived long enough to conduct an experiment. Does the magnet eventually fall -- say after 100 years? That depends on how much energy went into making the magnet. :roll:


Depends on the chemical and environmental conditions, not how much energy went into creating the magnet. Once magnetized it will stay magnetized until adversely affected by some mechanical, magnetic, or chemical process. All the energy used to create the magnet is used to align the domains. The domains will then stay aligned forever unless the material degrades due to some chemical process (heat, corrosion, etc.) or is disrupted by some mechanical (smash with a hammer) or adverse magnetic field. If your refrigerator is chemically and magnetically isolated and you simply leave things alone, the magnet should stay stuck forever.

Yadaraf wrote:

I would have to disagree with you regarding energy transference. If you stroke a iron nail with a magnet are you not transferring energy to the nail? How many nails can magnetize in this fashion before your magnetic source becomes useless? An infinite amount?


Bring on those nails. You'll simply stroke until the magnet is worn down to nothing. There's no theoretical limit to how many nails can be magnetized.

OC
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