top

Magnetically Assisted Pendulum

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

Sat May 09, 2009 3:49 am PostPost subject: Magnetically Assisted Pendulum
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Ok, I've spent what time I could carve out on trying to get a handle on the Maxwellian perspective of the Pendulum Gain that I showed in the video. Trying to get a specific function that allows insertion of the vector angles was a bit trying, but I think I found a couple that get us close. Click here for the link . Down about 2/3 of the way we find:

`F_r(vec r, alpha, beta)= - (3 mu_0 m_1 m_2)/ (4pi r^4)[2cos(phi - alpha) cos (phi - beta) - sin(phi - alpha) sin(phi - beta)]`

And

`F_phi(vec r, alpha, beta)- (3 mu_0 m_1 m_2)/ (4pi r^4) sin (2phi - alpha - beta)

This was quite helpful because it allowed me to approximate the force between my table stator magnet and the moving rotor magnet for the various angles that it passes through on the pendulum arc and determine if mathematically we should be seeing the effects observed.

Below is a picture of the 5 traces I wanted to look at. The mathematical structure is such that it is scaled 63:1 graphically to the Whipmag II rotor and base, so 0.015873016 on the graph = 1mm. Not shown on the graph is the stator which exists on 0, -1.085714286 at the top of the stator pole (x,y) and 0,-1.085792401 for the dipole center. As I write this I realize that the distance r for the above formula should be in meters and it is likely (have to check my calcs) that the force curve is distorted by a factor of 1000. Corrected 090509=152532. So, it is still a work in progress.

Click For Larger

The Arc Path is the path the dipole center takes as it sweeps 180. Leading is the path the leading pole takes, and Trailing is the trailing pole (self explanatory). `F_r(vec r, alpha, beta)` & `F_phi(vec r, alpha, beta)` are the force curves respectively. Note that the phi curve is very miniscule and follows the Y = 0 line across the sweep. So there is one force curve that represents the vector between dipole centers along the radius between them and another that represents an angular force relative to the phi angle. (See the diagram on website for Global Coordinates for a clue as to what alpha, beta and phi relate to in this regard).

Not yet included is the gravitational portion of forces applied.

Please note that the force is not directly applied to the rotor tangentially but is applied to the pole surface at the phi angle relative to the x plane centered at the stator dipole center. Therefore, even though a good force is present near 90 nearly none of that will be applied to rotor torque.

If you would like a copy of my spreadsheet, PM me with a request.

The math shows the magnetic force to be conservative, balanced on both sides of the swing. So, we obviously have something going on that needs explaining.

Cheers,

Cool


Last edited by Harvey on Sat May 09, 2009 11:00 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat May 09, 2009 7:16 am PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

The 'gain' that u have (and we have seen) from ur initial experiment, how are u going to quantify it in terms of measurement?

Is it a percentage, of an anglular increase from horizontal.

I have latching idea for ur pendulum, but not as u know it Jim (Colonel)

(its all mustard at the mo) Confused
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sat May 09, 2009 8:55 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

The gain manifests as an increase in gravitational potential energy (higher stop point). Without the magnets in place and just a dead weight on the rotor we have no gain. Removing gravity from the equation also produces no gain. This is easily done by laying the rotor flat but leaving the magnets in place and then placing the wheel at 270 (BDC, but laying flat). The magnets alone are not able to bring the rotor around the next 90 to 360 (or 0 as it is marked) Since there is a resistance going in and a mild attraction going out we must conclude that the gain is not a factor of any single force. And since Newtonian physics states that it cannot gain energy from momentum, a reduction of friction (as in lifting of the rotor off the bearings as it passes BDC) or from the conservative force of gravity, we must conclude that it is gaining from a combination of force interactions. Perhaps Howard Johnson was right and there is a Quantum reason behind it.

I've reworked the math and put in the proper values for r and the curve is dramatically different and needs to be on a chart of its own because of the scaling. The force curve is much more like a heartbeat now. So, where does all that energy go from compressing that force at BDC where the force is greatest? I have a theory, but I don't just want to blurt it out here. If it goes where I think it does, then it becomes available to add positive torque to the rotor on the upswing. But storing it must not cost as much as getting it back. There must be another force at work that helps store it and helps give it back so we get a gain. Time will tell.

I did a hand drawing of a latch mech, but I think we need more gain in order to effect the latch and pivot I have in mind. Perhaps yours is less friction-ey. Wink

I will probably swap the pic in the original post and clean up the text for the 1000 magnitude error on the distance between magnets. Also, now the phi track is closer to the r track with slight variations. I'll get that up after some sleep.

These are the magnets I am using:

Ok, who is modifying my posts before they get uploaded to FizzX - Knock It OFF Exclamation
http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=DX44

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=DX84

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=D48&cat=13

Cheers,

Cool


Last edited by Harvey on Tue May 19, 2009 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat May 09, 2009 10:58 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

I've corrected the first post graphic to truly reflect the force vectors to scale.

I find three things interesting: 1) It does not accurately reflect the reality because I find that there is repulsion on both sides of BDC with one side being noticebly less but still there nonetheless. 2) The transition through the rotor equator is not sharp but scales about 2.75mm each side. 3) The force does not fall off to negligable amounts as shown on the graph which would indicate nearly a flat line after just a few degrees either side of BDC.

Naturally, we could change this relationship by altering the position of the stator, but if the graph were correct, there is virtually no Magnetic Potential Energy present at the two extremes of travel.

Interestingly, when I increase the travel angle from 180 to greater swings, thereby adding more energy (and friction due to increased travel) the gain diminishes. However, by adding energy in this way, I am able to reduce the distance between the stator and the Arc Path and increase the gain by some factor. However there is a definite ceiling to this where again the gain begins diminishing and bringing the stator closer yet only results in an unpassable wall.

I wish I had others experimenting with this also so we could compare notes.

I may experiment with my mathematical model and see if an optimum can be found for various gauss values and distances.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 10, 2009 7:44 am PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

And Jim, without mixing pendulum and WhiPmag up tooo much,
how much more gain would u get if the stator was rotating slowly at first, so thus
presenting a leading attraction edge that was falling away (GW),
and backing itself up with a repulsive stage just as the magnet passes
overhead (as if I was the magnet), giving an additional repulsion field, not just a static one?

>I dont know how i do it for half the monies

Chrisemptyingbrainofshitebis
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sun May 10, 2009 10:01 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Here is what I want to know: Why does the gain occur on the side that is repelling going in and attracting going out? It seems backwards. And when we turn them around, attracting in and repelling out we get a loss.

Also, in my preliminary tests with a Mylow config (and I think Clanzer noted this also), it too gave more thrust when in the direction of opposition leading and attraction trailing. This reversed effect is very counter intuitive but real.

Neutral
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 10, 2009 4:37 pm PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

Because of momentum and inertia i feel.
u have weight of the magnet (rotor) falling towards the stator that is sitting on the table static, tho waiting for some passing fly.

I think we all know, it seem to take less force to push magnets together in attraction, than it seems to pull them apart in repulsion (The Steorn Theory i believe)
So the downward travelling rotor magnet doesn't know wots coming until its almost to late (in terms of repulsion) tho they never touch, whereas prior to the exiting this single system, the repulsive stage would appear to be a greater force (complex i think u guys called it) where the domains are now intertwined and repeling each others lines of flux, hence a small attraction force on exit, and the resultant larger repulsion force sending it on it way. Cool
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sun May 10, 2009 8:45 pm PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

Evening Colonel.

As the famous line went;- 'Its just you and me kid, against the World'

Anyways, for what use i might be, i've been cogging about ur pendulum conundrum, and have got couple of Chrissketchforengland style sketches for u to look at and maybe discuss.

First one 086 is how i see the rotor on its downward stage (Start of repulsion stage)
Here, the rotor/pendulum starts travelling, using only gravity at first, till the rotor magnet begins to experience the first taste of repulsion.
As the rotor approaches the stator, i imagine the rotor magnet experiencing a repulsed turning moment about its centre as it tries to push away from the fixed and repulsing stator magnet that is nailed in the base (table).
As momentum picks up, the repulsion force is increasing and the turning force now acting on the rotor and the stator, enscribes a vector force that if the objects where allowed to move, would be in the direction shown.
neither magnet can actually move as they are captive, so the repulsion phase of the rotor has to endure the full force of repulsion and i imagine the domains are extremely excited at this conflict.

In sketch 087 the replusion is all but over (End of repulsion stage), and the weaker attraction (by comparison), in now in play, alters the vector force slightly, tho not enough to change the eventual rotor course, and so the net gain appears as in ur test rig.
The attraction phase (as the results have shown), be so small a loss to the system, that it cannot cancel out the repulsive gain.

Anyways- thats my tiny brain empty for 60 seconds or so.

This any use;- the ramblings of this over the pond building fool??

Mr Green with Miss Scarlet on top. Razz
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sun May 10, 2009 10:34 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Out for the evening, will check it all later.

Wink

Just looked at the pics real quick before I go, the disk is N on top, S on the bottom. It is mag. thru, not diametric.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon May 11, 2009 6:28 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

After Playing around with math a bit, moving the stator up and down mathematically and watching the curve I've come to the conclusion that these functions are not very accurate. They assume a very small dipole length compared to a large separation value (r). Altering the stator height only changes the force amplitude significantly, the curve structure remains in tact for a given x point.

I think we are getting a division of the fields because of the dipole 1/2" separation on the rotor mag and the larger surface area of the stator disc. But these functions don't seem to address either of those variables. I still need a better equation to work with that allows me to deal with these variables. I liked this one because it kept things in the same rotational plane which simplified things a bit.

Whatever it is that makes this difference, it is easily felt with the hands. Even though there is a strong lift agains gravity such that the rotor magnet is suspended at a higher point by the repulsion, pushing with gravity through BDC is smooth and of little pressure. But coming the other way, the magnet is suspended much lower, because attraction exists also and the push through BDC hits a noticeable wall of great pressure. I may try to quantify this with a torque arm and fish scale.

Long day, already tired.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 12, 2009 4:52 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Just wanted to blog a quick thought I just had. Since this is a partially gravity driven device, perhaps there is no need to reverse its direction. Instead, what we can do is put a diametrically magnetized disc (or ring) on a track that cuts through the center of the wheel. As long as the roll from side to side stops with the polarity correctly oriented and we provide a latch to hold the wheel while it switches sides, the gain will always have a gravitational advantage giving the rolling magnet a reason to switch sides. Naturally, we will have to compensate for field strength to ensure the stator does not interfere with the rolling across. But its a thought.

Your comments?

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 13, 2009 5:36 am PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

To tiired to get my head round that one- simple sketch should do it for me.
Please Colonel.

Sleepy Prof. Plum, wrenched himself in the Library!
Poor chap- tho he did have a magnetic personality.
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Wed May 13, 2009 6:34 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Sorry Chris, just wanted to document the thought before it went away. After thinking on it I don't think that approach would work out well as the path for the rolling magnet would need to resemble a mobius strip with with a slot in it. Too complex, I can see it, but it's not worth drawing. A straight track would result in a reduction over time and a moving track would be defeating.

The pendulum is still the better solution for now. I was able to see a gain above 90 which is promising, as it can lead to a very simple pivot which I will try to explain later. I will probably have to hand craft a pivot sometime soon.

Also, after much thought, I have come to the conclusion that shearing is occuring during the acceleration after BDC. I do not think my other hypothesis will hold up under the lower mass to force ratios and will probably have to be abandoned in part, if not entirely. As I explained to Drevtoobe in my video comments, if we drop a rock on a spring we cannot expect it to bounce higher than where we dropped it from. The energy must be coming from somewhere.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed May 13, 2009 10:01 pm PostPost subject:
Magluvin
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 25 Nov 2008
Posts: 499
Location: USA

Reply with quote

It seems mylow has created your pendulum horizontally and it seemes to be perpetual.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2SafNL6yqg&feature=channel_page
He says he has always been talking about it to us, hmm I dont recall that.
Beating that poor bush, well its spring so maybe it will survive.
He also says to get the rotor gap space, he measures the space between the 2 stators, and there you go. Bologna. When he first started showing this stuff, he didnt have double stator mags. Plus that doesnt make any sense at all.

Magluvin reporting Wink
_________________
I always think of it like an electric motor, ya gota have pole switching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 14, 2009 12:31 am PostPost subject:
Magluvin
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 25 Nov 2008
Posts: 499
Location: USA

Reply with quote

Actually I think it is your pen. idea Harvey. Mylow needs to bring out the level again for that table, or it is motor driven. next new vid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY&feature=channel_page

Watch the last min of the vid. Gravity or motor anyone?

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
 
Thu May 14, 2009 1:04 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Magluvin wrote:

Watch the last min of the vid. Gravity or motor anyone?


If it's gravity, he's still doing the impossible!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 14, 2009 1:46 am PostPost subject:
Magluvin
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 25 Nov 2008
Posts: 499
Location: USA

Reply with quote

How they hangin OC? Mr. Green gravity
I know that gravity in mylows motor is not doing a Harvey pendulum, but I thought he would get a kick out of it. It reminded me of it. And the vid before that, wobble wobble. Now with the poles as he says they are, no way is that happening. That would seem like all attraction and a flywheel keeps it going longer, but it seems to never stop.
I told Mylow I think its of level and made the point. The last time I told him that, he busted out the level and leveled it, and guess what, it didnt work, like it did off level.
So I just wanted to see if I could set HIM off kilter again. Mr. Green
trix. If I told him he had a motor running it, BLOCK party.

Good to see ya.

BBl

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
 
Thu May 14, 2009 5:27 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

One of the discussion I had with TK was centered around the way flux is sharply focused on the corners of a magnet. Mylow knows this intuitively. I did not take the time to read all the comments, but I noticed that Tony said the gaps were not all the same. There is some trial and error involved, or just a "hold it in the field and see" approach to it, but he does have a knack and he is trying to teach others how to do it. I have to respect that.

I recall Mylow discussing the gaps between the poles of his single stator, the gaps between the C magnets and the thickness of the stator poles early on. He definitely favors the sharp edged stators and rotors over any with rounded edges.

As we all know, the magnetic flux blooms away from the center of the magnet. When two magnets are side by side, the flux must intersect. But, following Maxwellian rules the flux cannot cross and must, by definition, all group together into a sharp knife edge right in the gap between rotor magnets. Likewise his stators do the same and provide an asymmetric path for the south seeking flux. It is all very kewl.


But, we still need to dismiss outside energy, aka the "L" train, or any other leaky EM source. I posted an encouragement to relocate and test again. I would think also, that the system is on loan and that Sterling would pick it up at some point to try in another geographical location. One thing is certain, somebody better duplicate this thing quick because it is starting to seem as though Mylow is one in 7 billion with the skill set to make it happen. With skeptophiles constantly telling us to get off 'their' planet it does raise an issue of safety at this new stage.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 14, 2009 5:38 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote



See Tag Here:
http://urad.net/forums/gallery/displayimage.php?album=7&pos=0
Quote:
Magnetically Assisted Pendulum modeled in Vizimag and plotted along a horizontal line between the stator and Arc Path. 19 frames 10 each, 180 to 360 the first frame is a starter frame and is a duplicate of the second frame.




ETA:

I have two animated vizimag gifs to accompany this data but I am having trouble getting them onto the web so people can view them. One is 3MB and the other is 7MB. There is some very interesting stuff going on here even in the 2D mathematical model and I wanted to share it. If anyone has experience with large animated gifs please let me know. I can import them into Windows Movie Maker but they lose so much resolution its horrible. You-tube doesn't accept them. My Gallery (Coppermine) seems to have a size limitation (even though I have increased the limit to 10Mb) and short of trying to frame grab this thing and post the 65 stills, I'm not sure what to do next.

If anyone wants the files I guess I can zip them and email them out.

Confused


Last edited by Harvey on Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:39 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 15, 2009 6:37 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Well I got the PHP limit increased with my IT guys so here are the links to the H-Res Gifs:

The first one corresponds to the above graphs. There are 20 frames. Frame 1 and 2 are identical. The other 19 represent 180 to 360 of travel in 10 increments per frame.
http://urad.net/forums/gallery/albums/userpics/Magnetically_Assisted_Pendulum_3.gif 3MB

The second one is a detailed version in 1 increments from 225 to 270
http://urad.net/forums/gallery/albums/userpics/Magnetically_Assisted_Pendulum_Zoom.gif 7MB
Notice in both that there is a NULL zone between the magnets even though they are in repulsion. Also notice in the second detail there are frames that show complete isolation, full disconnect, for both magnets.

We know that vizimag is limited to 2D, but it does incorporate Maxwells equations.

There is something going on here.

A link to the gallery:
http://urad.net/forums/gallery/displayimage.php?album=7&pos=0


Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 17, 2009 5:29 pm PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

Quote:

The first one corresponds to the above graphs. There are 20 frames. Frame 1 and 2 are identical. The other 19 represent 180 to 360 of travel in 10 increments per frame.
http://urad.net/forums/gallery/albums/userpics/Magnetically_Assisted_Pendulum_3.gif 3MB



At position frame five i think (certainly after four clicks of movement), the colours change quite dramatically, as tho the stator magnet is getting compression from the desending rotor mag. Plus it appears the rotor gets a kick up the backside from the stator just before BDC.

Any thoughts Colonel?
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Mon May 18, 2009 1:12 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

In the detail sequence, from 225 to 270 there is an oscillation in the flux reslulting in a total collapse of each field individually and complete separation (non interaction, shear, whatever you wish to call it) where you can see that no line connect the two magnets and the rotor sits isolated. These are where the greatest Log gradients are observed. Black represents Min and Red represents Max flux density on a log scale.

Note there is a null (light blue) bubble in the area between magnets as well as a strong trailing zone of Min flux density. These two zones seem to be interactive mathematically during the flux oscillations. The oscillation is observable as flux lines flipping from the inside (toward the spindle) to the outside (away from the spindle) sides of the rotor magnet. These anomolies are most likely related to the mathematical projections resulting in runaway infinite calculations, a limit in the software. In reality, the flux will orbit around the magnetic axis like an unbalanced weight hanging off one side. Eventually, it results in a disconnection and total collapse of the field into each magnetic structure. This event is a dipole moment cascade and can be likened to the reorintation of atoms during an MRI. If the timing is right, and the atoms return to their original magnetized positions after the rotor magnet passes 270, all of the energy they store is released into the field and apparently, a lttle extra comes with it. Perhaps this is the QMME that HJ hypothesized. Naturally, the susceptibility of the material under duress would play a large part in the energy stored, and the hysteresis would play a large part in the energy released. One could only imagine where the the extra energy comes from, but it is most likely a magnetocaloric event.

Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon May 18, 2009 6:25 am PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

Quote:

magnetocaloric

Question

U mean there's heat/burnt material energy exchange going on??
Always thought heat was the enemy of magnets, like Kriptonite was to Superman.
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Mon May 18, 2009 9:45 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

No, a magnetocaloric effect is when there is a temperature change in a material when it is subjected to a magnetic field or vice versa. Gadolinium is such a material and was instrumental in being able to reach near zero Kelvin temperatures during the Zero Point Energy experiments. Mylow was able to document a temperature using a thermometer on his stator of 50 some degrees while the room temperature was above 60. The actual temperatures are recorded by Sterling Allan as he was on the phone with Mylow when the measurements were taken. Tinsel Koala also noted a reduction in temperature in his stator assembly but was not able to differentiate between wind chill and any possible magnetocaloric effect. Aluminum is a very good conductor of heat and the cross bars used for stator support are good radiators. Even though the mean temperature of a room may be 68F, there are many particles in the air that can be cooler and willing to accept the energy that the aluminum will send it's way. Therefore, some ambient thermal energy can change locations, possibly in an oscillatory manner such that a cooler magnet may have a stronger field at one point and a weaker field during another part of the oscillation. The pulsing field can then serve as a drive mechanism. So it could be that ambient energy is converted to kinetic energy in that way.

WRT the pendulum however, I was referring to material temperature and a conversion of ambient thermal energy in the material directly to a magnetic field. In this case, increasing the thermal energy of the material can result in electrons taking a faster wider orbit than normal. As these electrons push the envelope of their shell path, they can begin spinning in a manner conducive to magnetic domain alignment and actually improve the spatial curvature responsible for permanent magnet fields. These would be special circumstances and specific conditions to produce this counter intuitive result.

Cheers.
Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Tue May 19, 2009 10:09 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Just corrected link for large magnet in post:
http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=10086#10086
Evil or Very Mad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:49 am PostPost subject:
chrisbis
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 279

Reply with quote

Harvey,

Morning Colonel.

Any progress on the pendulum as yet?

Hope ur not messing bout in the river too much on a HJ/Mylow replication as i read ur were the other week!! (Usually with assistance eh?)

Anyways, are u familar with this guys work?- gilbondfac

I was wondering wether one could incorporate a V gate accelerant type addition to the pendulum idea u had, and really get some gain.

As the pend falls, let it pass thro a V gate array, and see if more gain is achieved/resulted

Any thoughts sir?
_________________
underunity rules till proven overwise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Wed Jun 03, 2009 8:05 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Hi Chrisbis,

I have been doing joint research on the Pendulum and Mylow's gate, evaluating the replacement of gravity by momentum. The difference between these to forces is so drastic that they cannot be used in any true comparison. It seems that acceleration is a mandatory prerequisite to achieving a gain.

It could be argued that angular momentum is a form of constant acceleration but we must be cognizant of the fact that this is relative and the true circumferential velocity relative to an outside observer is constant when momentum is conserved. Apparently, as the acceleration out of the gate reduces to zero and the velocity becomes constant, the gain is neutralized.

I need to do some quantification tests, but apparently, when I increase the mass of the pendulum it has a negative result. In my demonstration, there seems to be a relationship between the rotor magnet field and the weight of the magnet itself, as this was the only thing that off-balanced the rotor. I really wish I could get others to try this on there WhiPMag II rigs and post the results.

Yes, I have contacted gilbondfac, he has ignored my emails. He works for a university and keeps his experiments in line with mainstream science. It is doubtful that he would ever collaborate on anything that deviated into fringe science. TK would be a better candidate for that.

Yes, I do believe the pendulum idea has merit with the V-gate and the Tri-gate. In all pendulum platforms the beauty is in the separation of the fields at the height of gravitational potential. This affords us a nearly effortless means of reversing the pole positions from a magnetic perspective while freeze framing the stored gravitational energy for the pass back. Most persons ignore the pendulum because it is not rotational, but its unique features should not be overlooked.


Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:12 pm PostPost subject:
Droid
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


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

Reply with quote

Quote:
Chrisbis
I was wondering wether one could incorporate a V gate accelerant type addition to the pendulum idea u had, and really get some gain.


What if the v-gate was in place for one direction of swing, but moved out of the wayor reversed as the swing reversed?
_________________
God Sends Me Many Signs. I'm Just Too Stupid To Realize It.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:50 am PostPost subject: Re: Magnetically Assisted Pendulum
Mr.Entropy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Posts: 67
Location: Canada

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
Ok, I've spent what time I could carve out on trying to get a handle on the Maxwellian perspective of the Pendulum Gain that I showed in the video.

What video? I think I missed something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:58 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

The Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP_o1_jBUSM&feature=channel_page

Now if we could only understand what is going on... Wink
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