Discussion about Lenz law

[boguslaw]

Hi

I don't know if that will be interesting but I want to start discussion about the famous Lenz law here. I think something interesting can be found by simply investigating the "weak" points in this law.

[boguslaw]

Move from "Donald Smith devices too good to be true"
with my comments inline (I use only a basci English so bear with me)

Originally Posted by level :

My understanding in basic terms is that Lenz's Law describes why an inductor behaves as an inductor. My descriptions may not be entirely correct as Lenz may have intended his description for a specific case, but I think Lenz's Law really does apply in all the cases described below, but this is just based on my own understanding.

Here are two different scenarios to consider:

(1) When you apply a voltage to an inductor, it induces a current in the inductor, and as the current is building up to its maximum value it generates a corresponding increasing and expanding magnetic field in and around the inductor. As this expanding magnetic field builds up, it's expanding flux lines cut the coils of the inductor and induce a voltage in the inductor which is in opposition to the voltage we are applying to the inductor. This induced opposing voltage is termed 'counter EMF' or 'back EMF'.

a) this is all fine but I'm missing the real comprehension how is that made in atomic level. First your comment above tells me that there is no magnetic field when no closed path because there is no current flow.
From experience I think we can agree about this right ? (However some deeper investigation here is needed and I expect someone already thought about it and tried a very long transmission line with open end and with a coil placed on this route. Then sending a signal on it a careful measurement of magnetic field on coil would answer a few questions)
b) another very valuable information is "current is building up to its maximum value it generates a corresponding increasing and expanding magnetic field in and around the inductor" - tells me that when maximum current is reached there is no further increase of magnetic field in or around inductor - again, magnetic field depends on current but surprisingly does not depend on time of current flow (?) (someone should expect then when something is flowing into limited area, flood will happen soon ). My guess is , that's because electron movement is not current, their drift is very slow in conductor. I assume so far that current is a wave passed like Don Smith explained from one electron to the other. Where is magnetic field so ?

c) "As this expanding magnetic field builds up, it's expanding flux lines cut the coils of the inductor and induce a voltage in the inductor which is in opposition to the voltage we are applying to the inductor." - are you sure ?
I don't see why it should be this way exactly.Except when we use common inductor with each turn in the same direction, but what if we have a coil with two turns and each in opposite direction wound (but still turns are connected of course)?

(2) When you apply a changing magnetic flux to an inductor using an electromagnet or moving permanent magnet, the changing magnetic flux lines cut the coils of the inductor and induce a voltage in the inductor, which in turn induces a current in the inductor. This current that is induced in the inductor in turn generates a magnetic field in and around the inductor coil which is in opposition to the changing magnetic flux which we applied to the inductor. This will generate an actual physical repulsing force on the electromagnet or permanent magnet we are using to apply the varying magnetic flux to the inductor. In this case, this is not a counter EMF, but a counter magnetic field that is produced, although the EMF that is produced in the inductor is oriented in such a way that the current it produces generates a magnetic flux that is in opposition the magnetic flux we are applying. So in that sense I guess it is still a counter EMF as well that is induced.

I still do not understand. I believe magnetic field has always two poles,right ? So you are stating that when I take a large magnet and move it's N pole to the wire, the current generated inside wire will create magnetic field of what polarity ? North ? South ? and where is the opposite pole created ?

So, more simply, Lenz's Law tells us that an inductor will act in such a way as to try to oppose any change we are trying to introduce to its current. If it has no current and we try to induce current flow in it, regardless of whether we are applying a voltage to the inductor or applying a varying magnetic flux to the inductor, the inductor will act to try to oppose this change in current.

Also, if we have a current already flowing in an inductor and we try to stop that current from flowing in the inductor, an inductor will act to try to keep that same current flowing. For example, if we open the circuit on an inductor that has current flowing in it, such that current can no longer flow in a complete circuit through the coil, the inductor's magnetic field will start to collapse and consequently the collapsing magnetic flux lines will cut the coils of the inductor and cause an increasing voltage to be generated in the inductor which is oriented in such a way as to try to maintain the current flow in the coil. If we have an open circuit, eventually the voltage climbs high enough that there is usually a spark that occurs on the switch contacts, which discharges the energy of the coil in a last blast of current created by the spark. This increasing voltage that occurs due to the collapsing magnetic field is not termed a counter EMF, since it is not countering an applied voltage, but this is still an effect of Lenz's law I believe (or maybe Lenz's law in reverse), since the inductor is still acting to oppose change to its current.

Again, this is just my understanding.

Collapse what ? Why magnetic field do not just vanish immediately in no time ? Looks like it has a supporting "thing" inside wire ?

Sorry guys, but I feel like a 2 years old child who was told that 2+2 =4 . So I'm asking : what is 2 and 4 , what is + and = ? and I've got an answer : "This is the law ,and law is just that. Learn the law."

[Ruphus]

This is how my small mind thinks of what's happening, and it may be incorrect. Think of the atomic structure of a wire. These atoms, and electrons are small magnets arranged into a net 0 magnetic field. Push a current through it and the magnetic poles line up, imagine each atom making a turn. It takes time for the line up to occur like grass in a flowing stream. They restrict the flow until it overpowers them. Now stop the flow and they want to return to a net 0, the grass wants to stand back up and when they do they restrict the flow and pull it back a bit.

My two cents.

[boguslaw]

This is how my small mind thinks of what's happening, and it may be incorrect. Think of the atomic structure of a wire. These atoms, and electrons are small magnets arranged into a net 0 magnetic field. Push a current through it and the magnetic poles line up, imagine each atom making a turn. It takes time for the line up to occur like grass in a flowing stream. They restrict the flow until it overpowers them. Now stop the flow and they want to return to a net 0, the grass wants to stand back up and when they do they restrict the flow and pull it back a bit.

My two cents.

Excellent ! That is EXCATLY what I think also.

Electrons are small magnets and they rotate to align with the EM wave being send from power source. Also I believe they can form one single "tube of force" at once so to pass more current power source must produce enough "tubes of force" or waves to pass through wire (if wire is not thick enough "tubes of force" explode it because I think beside electrons chain (tube of force) there is also crystal structure which is opposing flow = resistance, with enough tubes of force the resistance is enough to turn wire into pieces).
For resistance I can add Tesla analogy : a bad formed hose for water flow with many holes. It is known that due to resistance energy escape in form of heat or RF or any other radiation.


OK. So what we can learn based on this theory ? One very important thing :
magnetic field comes from electrons inside wire (small magnets) , from flipping they (quantum level) magnetic poles.
We can have only two situations , and I think those are what scientist should check (or it was already done but I didn't know):

1. Electric current causes a "movement" of electrons , their flip generate magnetic field around wire
2. Electric current is a full EM -kind wave via a wire (which acts as waveguide) - it contains also magnetic component and that component interacts with electrons , the rest remain the same : electrons flip and generate own magnetic field.


In both cases there is electron's magnetic field which is responsible for Lenz law. It's simply a realization of the most basic nature law : Newton III law.
Action vs reaction. The current electromagnetic laws seems to avoid this basic law.

The whole concept is wonderfully fruitful , just let it spin your mind....

I think we can quite nicely connect theory to Ed Leedscalnin and Joseph Newman concepts. I don't believe scientist didn't knew all that before.

[level]

Hi boguslaw. Just want to clarify something. I don't think Lenz's Law is so much about the details of why an inductor works the way it does, or what magnetism or magnetic fields are, or what electric current is, or what atoms or electrons are, etc. What people like Lenz did was actually very basic and straightforward. They took an inductor and ran experiments with it and carefully observed exactly how the inductor behaved under these different experimental conditions. Then based on these careful experimental observations they would describe the fundamental properties of the object under study.

Again, my understanding of the essence of Lenz's Law is it is just a description of how an inductor behaves when you apply a voltage or magnetic field to an inductor. It is based on actual experimental observation, not hypothesis or speculation.

For example, here is one expression of Lenz's Law:
"An induced electromotive force (emf) always gives rise to a current whose magnetic field opposes the original change in magnetic flux."
One only needs to do a basic and simple experiment to confirm that yes, this is exactly how an inductor does behave under this condition.

In regards to things like what is electric current, and what is an atom, or what is an electron, and what is magnetism, etc., again this has nothing much to do with Lenz's Law, which is just a description of how an inductor behaves based on careful experimental observation. We can confirm that Lenz's Law is valid because the operation of solenoids and transformers and electric motors and electric generators all confirm what Lenz observed, and we can also conduct very basic experiments with inductors and observe that what Lenz has described is confirmed by experiment.

This being the case, I don't think there is too much more to be said on the matter. If someone thinks there may be special cases where there are exceptions to Lenz's Law, then they should be able to demonstrate experimentally what this exception is. If they can't do something as basic as this, then it is just talk as far as I am concerned.

[Ufopolitics]

Great Thread!

Hello Boguslaw and all,

Great Thread my friend!, and I do believe you are completely right...as "Any Law"...it could always have its "exemptions"...or the way to "go around" them all...

I agree with your atomic view of the electrons side, as also stated by Ruphus.

Pier Luigi Ighina (Ex Marconi Assistant)...and creator of many weather changing "apparatus"...call it "Il Atomo Magnetico" (the magnetic atom)

Tesla also mentioned that fact...atomic alignment of trillions particles...as He spoke about Neutrinos back then.

However, I believe that they do not return, when power/flux/currents or whatever is disconnected, to a "neutral" position... I believe each atom have a very "particular" and different natural alignment which would be its "rest positioning"...due to many factors...like chemical/mechanical configuration/structures, surrounding environments...etc.
All this creates a "Natural State" which is a Random and very misaligned status...and that is the way they "live" in our Nature.

Now, when we shape a Coil in a specific fashion...that leads to "specific atomic alignment" when we apply a current flow...

Lenz law is real...and it manifests very accurately as described...and in order to "picture" it I would say that it creates a "Mirror Imaging" opposed to our input sense/flow.

A Generator is the typical example of this law...when the stator coils induce the generating coils, they "respond" by creating an opposite magnetic field to the one who generate it (stator)...then what happens?...they attract, not repulse...and the more load we apply...the stronger the magnetic attraction would be...Generator would get extremely "stiff" to be rotated...requiring a Monster Prime Mover...who would that be?...of course...the Gas Engine so far...right?

However, that ONLY "applies"... IF, we are projecting coils in a "Mirror-Symmetrical" way...
There are Asymmetrical Projection Angles between coils, where this law still prevails...but, the opposite reaction would be used to thrust rotation and not to counter/oppose it . The Toroidal Generator from Haynes is an example...but there are more and more ways...

I do not consider it is a "Violation" or even an "Exemption" to this Law...it is just a way to use it on our favor...

Originally Faraday stated the "Induction Law" based on just a single conductor and a Magnet where either one moves related to the second...
But He never stated that the magnet nor conductor must be of an specific shape...We started limiting ourselves to certain patterns...windings, coils and overall structural shapes and we "lock them" in time...

Unfortunately, many of those who started to "see it" thinking outside the locked box...are not around to tell Us how they did it...

Regards to All


Ufopolitics

[garrettm4]

Lenz's Electrical Observations = Newton's Mechanical Observations

Level,

I am almost in full agreement with you on this topic. And honestly there needs to be more people who can actually think clearly like yourself.

That said, it almost sounds like you're of the belief that it isn't possible to observe new conditions that are outside of Lenz's original findings, with regard to the Newtonian "back-reaction" of a force and its counter force. Now I don't want people to infer that you can eliminate the back-reaction (IT WILL ALWAYS EXIST), but instead, you can realistically, displace it in time or space.

An example of two phenomena that Lenz didn't observe are, Delayed Reverse Flux (displacement in time, magnetic viscosity effect), and Redirected Reverse Flux (displacement in space, multi-flux path effect) in magnetic circuits. Thanes Heinz has demonstrated both of these effects on the bench, so there is physical evidence of these being real and honestly quite logical.

Further, there is ABSOLUTELY NO "LAW" that says a reverse flux HAS TO connect back to its perturbing force, aside from cliche' "Lenz Law" interpreters. If you examine how magnetism really interacts, its merely the rate of change in magnetism (change in magnitude of magnetism per change in time) and the effective weber-turns connected to that change which causes a voltage to be seen on a secondary coil.

The induced voltage on the secondary when loaded, or shorted, causes a current to flow. Which in-turn causes a SECONDARY magnetic field, if you were to redirect the path of this secondary "back-reactionary" field you would have no change in impedance on the source magnetic circuit. Thus no loading at the primary. Lenz law still exists, as the field of the second coil IS in REVERSE, it's just that it isn't affecting the primary circuit as it has been redirected to a separate magnetic circuit.

The other phenomena is related to magnetic viscosity and hence the delay time of demagnetization and reversal. If you were to apply this to a motor, which Thanes has done, you would observe a mechanical drag associated with the movement of a rotating wheel of magnets relative to an iron core inductor set at the periphery of the rotating magnets. When shorted the inductor's induced voltage, due to the magnets alternately magnetizing the iron as they pass by, causes a secondary field that opposes the applied field of the magnets. Thus a drag or mechanical load is seen. However, after a certain speed threshold is reached, the magnetic viscosity induced delay in the reverse field causes an attraction force to be seen and now we have a NEGATIVE mechanical load, or more aptly an ACCELERATION being applied to the motor. If this acceleration is great enough it can cause the motor to begin acting like a generator and the flow of power will reverse back to the energy source powering the motor. This however is rare, and most you will ever see is a drop in motor driving current due to an increase in rotational speed - which is lower than the no-load quiescent state.

So it would seem illogical to believe that a force and it's counter force always have to be in the same time frame or spacial envelope of existence. Concluding, the idea isn't to prevent a counter force, but instead, to delay it in time or redirect it in space.

*On a final note, I wouldn't get into "electrons" and "how they work" as most people have no idea what they are talking about. Charge carriers are weird and do not behave as most think they do; electrons DO NOT move down a wire like water in a pipe, the charge jumps from electron to electron in the Drude gas. Further, complicating simple phenomena like Lenz law with subatomic particles is plain stupid. This is because of the dot convention and Benjamen Franklin "conventional current", which doesn't mix well with modern particle physics.

Regards,
Garrett

[boguslaw]

garrettm4

Contrary, without understanding what is hidden behind Lenz law , you can't find how to avoid it's consequences. Would be interesting to ask Thane how he found his method of regenerative acceleration coil and if to explain it he used the atomic model...
If I'm right, then every electronic book should be re-written, and Ufopolitics method is one of the same range you mentioned. Add here also various famous devices like TPU or Kapanadze devices ....

Kind of usage : v8 суперотскок от резинового шарика.avi - YouTube used by NASA

[Farmhand]

Explanations

I would like to hear explanations from Garret and Level on what they think is
happening in these video's where acceleration under load and short circuit is
observed. Thane's Lenz Law "violations" are related directly to the
acceleration under load effect, his words not mine.

Short clip.
Acceleration under load effect ( 'Par-Petua' : ) Short clip.wmv - YouTube

Full clip part 1. Showing setup mainly
Generator rotor acceleration when loaded 1 (Par-Petua Setup. - YouTube

Full clip part 2. Showing Effect.
Generator rotor acceleration when loaded 2 (Par Petua - YouTube

And the transformer effects are the same effect, I remember Thane saying so.
He also says that any one showing acceleration under load effects is showing OU, I disagree.

Regenerative acceleration transformer effects. At 8:00 mins I do a funny trick with a fluro held in the hand.
(Regenerative acceleration transformer effects ?) Bogus or not - YouTube

Similar effect
This is with a pair of air core resonant transformers one is the generator of
the HF AC supplied by a battery and the other is the output transformer.

Reduced input under load effects.wmv - YouTube

Showing reduced load on supply battery.
Reduced input current under added load effects 33 - YouTube

It makes me wonder if I can see these effects and produce them on demand
based on what I have learned form conventional sources. Is there really
anything going on outside of predicted behavior based on conventional knowledge ?

The entire lecture is good but at 33:00 and 36:00 he explains why the frequency
restricts the max current.

MIT Lecture (Inductance)
Lec 20 | MIT 8.02 Electricity and Magnetism, Spring 2002 - YouTube

Cheers

P.S. What I did was got annoyed at what I seen as misleading misconceptions
or deliberate misleading, I seen a couple of Thanes video's and knew
intuitively what was most likely happening, it seems obvious to me the motor
generator and transformer effects are because of frequency related current
restrictions or an increased abnormal Lenz effect under no load but reduced
by the load.

The BiTT is a bit different but I see no demo's with any more than flea power.
Maybe there is a reason for that. Without any higher power demonstrations I
see nothing to get excited about concerning the BiTT.

..

[Ruphus]

I don't think Lenz's Law is so much about the details of why an inductor works the way it does, or what magnetism or magnetic fields are, or what electric current is, or what atoms or electrons are, etc.

I agree, I felt boguslaw was looking for possible answers as to why it works as it does. What was "hidden" in the wire as he said.

As I said before I could be completely wrong as it's all speculation. My apologies for any confusion I may have added to the thread.

[level]

Level,
That said, it almost sounds like you're of the believe that it isn't possible to observe new conditions that are outside of Lenz's original findings, with regard to the Newtonian "back-reaction" of a force and its counter force. Now I don't want people to infer that you can eliminate the back-reaction (IT WILL ALWAYS EXIST), but instead, you can realistically, displace it in time or space.
...

Hi garrettm4. No, I see everything as working models, and not as absolutes. The idea of calling things 'laws' probably goes back quite a ways in history, but I think it is an unfortunate choice of word for such things. Since I see everything as working models, then I see no reason why we can't modify any of our working models accordingly if we come across evidence that shows our current models are lacking or incomplete or wrong in one way or another.

I have experimented with the Thane Heins bitoroid transformer configuration somewhat, and although I am able to see the effect he described, I have not been able to measure over unity as of yet. One person who posted here stated that this effect can be explained as high leakage inductance, and it seems at least possible that might explain the effect, as what I have noticed in my own experiments is there is very little power available to the load in this arrangement. That seems consistent with a high leakage inductance arrangement. I haven't drawn any conclusions either way about this though, as my experimental setups so far have not been very ideal. Anyway, that is veering off the topic here.

[Farmhand]

Also here is a video showing the efficient lighting of the same 25 Watt globe and
using the same transformer as used in the video in my previous post.

Very efficient lighting with AC.wmv - YouTube

In this case the globe has 243 volts across it or so and is fully lit using the rated
power, I think it shows that at least part of the idle power losses are negated
when a load is applied as well. If nothing else it shows the very same setup can
properly drive the globe to full brightness with good efficiency.

We can see that the efficiency is related to the light produced and the power
consumed. When somebody shows a globe fully lit with the rated power and a
total efficiency of over 100% considering all power consumed from a battery.
Then I will be thinking something new is happening.

I haven't seen anything that looks like breaking any Laws in any of the video's
I linked in this thread. In fact the effects are in "line" with the Laws as far as
I can tell.

Cheers

P.S. I agree with Level on the Laws thing, if we something that definitely
contradicts the Laws without doubt and is repeatable then they are no longer
valid Laws. I have no problem with the understanding of them being changed
I'm not a big fan of Laws, but, if the shoe fits ....


..

[shylo]

Rise time

Hi All, Interesting thread, when you make a connection, there's a spike. When you break it there's a spike. Connect it and break at the same time,same time.
This is where a mercury switch might work,I'd like to try it.
I think the law is sound, I've done many test's and seen the drag effect ,when load is added.
Transformers can catch the spike ,and store it in caps, without causing drag.
The switch is the hard part
shylo

[level]

Hi farmhand. Your videos are very well done. That lecture by the MIT prof is really interesting as well. I don't really have any explanations off the top of my head about the regenerative acceleration effects or the effects of seeing reduced input power under load with the transformers. I have been experimenting and seeing similar sorts of effects with different types of transformer setups as well, but I don't have any confident explanations at this point. Still experimenting and observing and thinking about things, but taking it slowly due to limited time.

[level]

I agree, I felt boguslaw was looking for possible answers as to why it works as it does. What was "hidden" in the wire as he said.
As I said before I could be completely wrong as it's all speculation. My apologies for any confusion I may have added to the thread.

Hi Ruphus. No worries at all. It never hurts to discuss different ideas. I just wanted to clarify that the details about exactly why things work the way they do in inductors is not really key to understanding Lenz's law. Lenz described the important properties of inductors under certain conditions and the exact why of it all is left for others.