I haven't tested this theory but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. As we all know, current can be induced in a copper coil, that is wrapped around an iron core, if that iron core contains a magnetic flux that is either increasing in strength or decreasing in strength. If the flux strength is constant, no current is induced. I've always been puzzled as to why that would be and here is my solution to that mystery.

Imagine an iron rod that is horizontal, which is wrapped by a copper wire in a series of turns to create a coil. If we could see inside the iron core, an increasing magnetic flux might appear as a wave of energy. When that wave hits the first turn of the coil, there will be a difference in flux strength between the wire of the first turn and the wire of the 2nd turn next to it. I believe that it's that difference that induces the current. The reason why I think this is the case, is that the current induced in the first turn generates it's own magnetic field which, because the flux at that point is higher, will overpower the magnetic field that is generated by the wire in the adjacent turn, which is pushing against adjacent magnetic fields and therefore current flows. When overall field strength in the core is constant, the magnetic field generated by each turn of the coil, is exactly equal to that of every other turn of the coil and counteracts each other meaning that there is no current flow.

But supposing that the turns of the coil, were separated from each other by enough distance that their own magnetic fields would not interact? In that case, why wouldn't a magnetic flux of constant strength, passing through the iron core, induce a current in the coil? If this theory is correct, then one magnet, connected to an iron core, which is wrapped with a coil that has spaces between turns, should generate a constant flow of DC. I hope someone, who is experienced with building electric devices, which I am not, will try this and post the results.

Hi buddy

base on my observation and experiment, in order for an electron or current to flow, then there should be an inbalance number of electrons from the two metals.

So therefore by making a pulse, then we are making an inbalance to something that is constant, and the faster pulse, then the strongest making of inbalance and the more powerful sucking effect of electron from the outside.

I like this conclusion ... the ether is the source.

I'm not familiar with this site. Can you tell me what the name of the pdf file is and where to look for it?

I've downloaded the file and I've skimmed the contents. I'm not an engineer. A lot of the terms and math is way over my head. Can you point me to the section that contains the nugget you referred to? thanks.

 Here is a statement that I've found in a physics textbook. (The induced EMF is equal to the rate of change of magnetic flux linking the circuit.) So in my concept, the rate of change in magnetic flux is due to changing flux density at the point of contact with the various turns of an attached coil. When the iron core thickness is changing, the flux density at one end of the coil will be different from the density at the other end of the coil. The satisfies the statement above.

  (changing flux density) if you can have the flux change in your model equally to what it would change in a motor or generator which is actually a change to the extent of being reversed across the entire coil then sure but it has to do so repeatedly to cause a continued change in the wire.Otherwise it will just find equalibrium and do nothing.
 The text book should have said "constantly changing flux density" get over it.

What is important to note here, is that for current to be induced, there must be a CHANGE in flux. Not merely a difference in flux between two coils, or flux density gradient across the length of a coil.

So let me see if I got this straight. A difference in flux density gradient across the length of a coil is not the same thing as a change in flux. Huh? What's the difference? If you have a change in flux, do you not get a difference in flux density gradient across the length of a coil for a tiny fraction of a second? How does the coil 'know' that the total amount of flux inside the iron core has changed or not changed if it's not the flux density at the surface of the core that supplies the critical information?

The problem with this idea is that current in a coil is not technically caused by the change in field strength, it is induced when the magnetic field lines of force are pushed from one side of the conductor to the other side. That is why current is only generated from a moving magnet. Changing the field density usually causes some field lines to cross through the conductor but is not in itself the reason current is induced in the conductor.
As the field line tries to cross the conductor an electron starts to move which then generates a field in opposition to the field line that is trying to incite the movement.

Studentofhistory
 Are you splitting hairs for the sake of clarity? The magnet will only cause a reaction when its flux comes into contact with the core and coil. It would look like a single 1/2wave on a scope for that short time then go flat and never move again unless the magnet is moved away or flipped north for south. If it just sits there static then the coil will also be static after the first introduction. No net preasure remains. It is very short temporary reaction. If your thinking or comparing it to a magnet sticking to another metal object which is continous that is because the object is made with random ordered material which resists perminant alienment. Just like when a spring wants to return to it's shape or length. That provides the stick to itiveness to the magnet. If that was then wrapped with a wire coil the coupling of the magnet to the wire is very lossy. The wire wont stick like the core will. It does not have the same properties. It acts more like sympithetic induction from that respect. Still to get a constant flow or reaction takes a constantly changing feild. It's really not very efficient mechanically. Not like locking two gears together.Still beats the crap out of having the planet wrapped with pullies and belts or long trails of gears.
 If you aiming to produce something that does not require mechanical input you have to tap an outside source of fluctuations.More imortantly with that is to filter out unwanted intrusions from other sources which may act to cancel out your target frequency. With that you would find most naturally acurring freq's are week except for lightning strikes.You could take the route of getting all the week freq's to sync through individual conversion to single one but that would be a lot of work.Plus you would need a good method of detection, long term plotting ect..
 As for the notion of a static magnetic solenoid creating a constant output there is no way unless an outside force is working against the magnet. The magnet in question would have to be week enough to interact,then your back to a feeble output to the xtent that you may not even be able to detect it.