Motionless Electromagnetic Generator

[boguslaw]

BIG question : is magnetic field just energy which can be re-used infinitely if not disturbed too much ? That would be marvellous ! I have yet not found definitive answer.Some curious old information seems to confirm that pioneers of electrical science used Faraday induction law quite differently. Many dynamo-electric generators from 1800 was made with rotating iron-less coils for example, where the magnetic field is not broken at all. Remember : do not kill the dipole ! If they worked fine then why was the concept forgotten ?

[kEhYo77]

Hi(siema) Boguslaw.
The more I think about it the more sense it makes to view electromagnetic interactions as waves, vortexes, pressure differentials, inertia, spin orientations and so on. We need to create a conjugate mirror in a magnetic circuit to reflect input power back to source and at the same time power a load.

[Matthew Jones]

BIG question : is magnetic field just energy which can be re-used infinitely if not disturbed too much ? That would be marvellous ! I have yet not found definitive answer.Some curious old information seems to confirm that pioneers of electrical science used Faraday induction law quite differently. Many dynamo-electric generators from 1800 was made with rotating iron-less coils for example, where the magnetic field is not broken at all. Remember : do not kill the dipole ! If they worked fine then why was the concept forgotten ?

Do you have an example? Documentation or something.

I fail to see how any one at that time could keep a constant magnetic field with out either powering continuously or looping it in iron.

Maybe I am not grasping what your saying.

Matt

[Ted Ewert]

BIG question : is magnetic field just energy which can be re-used infinitely if not disturbed too much ? That would be marvellous ! I have yet not found definitive answer.Some curious old information seems to confirm that pioneers of electrical science used Faraday induction law quite differently. Many dynamo-electric generators from 1800 was made with rotating iron-less coils for example, where the magnetic field is not broken at all. Remember : do not kill the dipole ! If they worked fine then why was the concept forgotten ?

The magnet field produced by a permanent magnet is a particular "condition" of the ether in my opinion. It is also a balanced condition.
In order to to produce work this balanced condition must be disturbed. The potentially recoverable energy is the result of Nature rebalancing the system.
If we apply DC to a solenoid we obtain a steady magnetic field, much like a permanent magnet. However, wrapping wire around a magnet gives us no DC in return. Why is this?
This is because the magnet is in a balanced state. The "force" and the "current" (however you would define them) are are in phase with respect to time and space.
Moving a magnetic field with respect to another object, such as a coil, causes an imbalance in the phase relationship of the field. The degree of this imbalance is directly related to the relative velocity between the field and the object.
This indicates to me that there is a propagation differential between the two elements of the field. I see it as the "force" element having no mass and the "current" element having mass. Thus, the force would lead the current as it passed by a stationary coil, lending to the condition of induction within the coil.
A switched flux has no differential and consequently produces no power. As I stated earlier, finding a way to cause a phase differential without moving the field is the key to making the MEG work. A unique configuration, resonance, or some other method needs to be employed to accomplish this. I have no doubt it's possible.
However you want to define magnetism is really immaterial. It all comes down to how it works. Building and experimenting is the only way to find out.

Cheers,

Ted

[boguslaw]

Just look for Clemente Figuera enigma and his 1902 patent and follow it to find many old inventions of dynamo-electric machines from Ferranti and even Tesla.Some others too (whom I don't remember now). Basically the first generators were simple rotating plates with flat coils WITHOUT iron core , very closely remebling some offered now plans of free energy generators like QEG, Witts,also Bruce de Palma,Don Smith and others. A set of stationary coils and the rotating plate rotor with flat coreless coils in gap between them.

[boguslaw]

Last pages of this thread contains detailed informations Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

[boguslaw]

If you take it slowly I think you would agree that in today used generators there is a big mass of rotor with iron core rotating at required rpm. In almost ALL I could find dynamo-electric machines from between 1800 and 1900 patented that is EXACTLY what they tried to eliminate !
Figuera explained that in the most clear way, I would explain in my own words (in simple English so please bear with me) : between rotor iron core and the stator iron core there is magnetic attraction due to magnetic DIPOLE formed once the rotor is in exact position when two iro ncores are facing each other, but due to the round shape of the rotor and of course due to bearings that attraction is not big and can be defeated easily by the mechanical force applied to the shaft.
However once the coils of rotor (they used mostly commutator based generators or with sliprings so current was taken from rotor coils) are connected to the load the induced current makes from the rotor core an electromagnet progressively rised the magnetic attraction of cores once more load is applied.Thus it is ASSUMED that generator is a converter of mechanical force into electricity. Everytime the magnetic dipole formed between cores are broken when there is enought force applied to the shaft.

If that is not the famous Tom Bearden "DON'T KILL THE DIPOLE" , that what is this ?

[Ted Ewert]

I happen to agree that iron is a problem and designed a motor / generator built along these principals.


Nevertheless, what does this have to do with the MEG?

[Matthew Jones]

@boguslaw
I see what your saying now you above post said coils with rotating coils between them. But you meant copper Discs.

@Ted
Maybe I am going to say the same thing you are, I am not understanding what your talking about, It over my vocabulary.
But I think the problem is not anything to do with type of flux and offsetting anything. I think simply a time factor.
When you rotate a magnet in front of the iron the flux slowly saturates the iron the closer the magnet gets to the iron the higher voltage.
In this case where the flux is already saturating part of the iron the switch (Snap Back) happens to fast, it not slow like a rotating magnet. Its instant. And the iron(or media) can't respond correctly.

So you can see the effect in a simple test. You have a magnet in hand and a coil in the other. Put your scope on the coil. Hold the magnet over the coil and let it go. You might find a small SPIKE in voltage, nothing that would equate power over time . Now wave it past and see a larger RISE in voltage over the period if time.

I think its just a time issue, the metal saturates too fast to register as a rise in voltage on the copper.

The other indicator is the materials they are looking to use, and the switching.
To emulate the slow rise and fall of saturation in a rotary gen, you would need a very specific curve on your switching time and the DC offset of the initial switch would be high, so that you have actually started across the threshold of diverting the flux instantly but the flux would divert away and towards slowly.
No simple matter, but like you said its probably possible, but who the hell can do it is the question.

Matt

[shylo]

compression

Hi All, Excellent discussion,
I have a question , when you force 2 of the same poles together the lines , do they compress and become stronger for a given area?
That is more concentrated for the same amount of area? Or do they keep the same strength but spread out over a greater area?
I'm working with Matts V-Track , but with a wheel am getting closer to making it work, when I get it to run I want to add coils but steel is a definite no no.
Lenz will assist in rotation due to the opposite field produced by any coil that is fed power.
Sorry but all generators require motion.
artv

[boguslaw]

Imagine a plate of non-magnetic material with a set of coreless flat coils on both sides, or a two flat round plates with such coils between them. Then rotate such plate between stationary set of coils on both sides in either N-S-N-S configuration or in same poles facing each other or in any variation and you got most of old designs. For large power it has to be large of course and also stacked around the shaft in repeating manner sequencially. And I'm not talking about small power. Ferranti had build commercial big generators for sale around 1890.

[Ted Ewert]

@Ted
Maybe I am going to say the same thing you are, I am not understanding what your talking about, It over my vocabulary.
But I think the problem is not anything to do with type of flux and offsetting anything. I think simply a time factor.
When you rotate a magnet in front of the iron the flux slowly saturates the iron the closer the magnet gets to the iron the higher voltage.
In this case where the flux is already saturating part of the iron the switch (Snap Back) happens to fast, it not slow like a rotating magnet. Its instant. And the iron(or media) can't respond correctly.

So you can see the effect in a simple test. You have a magnet in hand and a coil in the other. Put your scope on the coil. Hold the magnet over the coil and let it go. You might find a small SPIKE in voltage, nothing that would equate power over time . Now wave it past and see a larger RISE in voltage over the period if time.

I think its just a time issue, the metal saturates too fast to register as a rise in voltage on the copper.

The other indicator is the materials they are looking to use, and the switching.
To emulate the slow rise and fall of saturation in a rotary gen, you would need a very specific curve on your switching time and the DC offset of the initial switch would be high, so that you have actually started across the threshold of diverting the flux instantly but the flux would divert away and towards slowly.
No simple matter, but like you said its probably possible, but who the hell can do it is the question.

Matt

Your simple test above is one that I have also used to test a change in saturation vs induction. In this test we find that although the core of the inductor goes from unsaturated to almost fully saturated, there is no corresponding voltage or current induced.
This is because the magnet is travelling directly at the core of the coil instead of crossing it at 90 degrees. This perfectly illustrates the problem with the MEG. Switching a magnet in a MEG is the same as letting a magnet fall straight on to the end of a coil core.
So again, this begs the question: what is the difference between a magnet travelling past a coil core at 90 degrees and one traveling straight at the core? One causes induction and the other doesn't, although they both cause a change in flux through the iron core?

[Matthew Jones]

Your simple test above is one that I have also used to test a change in saturation vs induction. In this test we find that although the core of the inductor goes from unsaturated to almost fully saturated, there is no corresponding voltage or current induced.
This is because the magnet is travelling directly at the core of the coil instead of crossing it at 90 degrees. This perfectly illustrates the problem with the MEG. Switching a magnet in a MEG is the same as letting a magnet fall straight on to the end of a coil core.
So again, this begs the question: what is the difference between a magnet travelling past a coil core at 90 degrees and one traveling straight at the core? One causes induction and the other doesn't, although they both cause a change in flux through the iron core?

Ok so were on the same page. But if time is the factor that prevent voltage then the guys in the video, Beardens partners, are correct they need faster switch's and different material. Then its achievable.
I have the same problems. If I had $100k worth of cow crap, my produce farm would be extremely profitable. I'll bet I am a better investment... LOL

Cheers
Matt

[Cherryman]

All this reminds me a little of a homopolar generator/motor.

See this vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOZl...X0Pe5DS8MLLZWw

And now turn the workings a little around.

On top a flat pancake coil
In the middle a copper disk
And below a flat pancake coil

Would be interesting to see if you could tap current from the edge of the copper disk without it rotating.
The rotating would be provided by the movement of the current in the coils.

Another

Interesting to see what would happen if you would use those two pancake coils as primary for two opposite Tesla coils and make the discharge top a aluminium half sphere discharging in the opposite coil

[tachyon]

its as simple as F=qv x B