You proposed that wiring four transformers together might defeat Lenz' Law.  All that your four transformer configuration could do is reverse one phase.  The intrinsic Lenz' Law obeying Faraday induction is unaffected by how you choose to wire your transformers externally.  If you wire two counterphased signals together that are of equal magnitude, they cancel out and you get nothing.  Wire two counterphase signals in parallel and they effectively short each other out.  It does not take four transformers to demonstrate these effects.

Hi MarkE,

Sorry, most likly i am wrong, OK

lets assuming the impossible became possible? right
what we think about a free energy device with two outputs? like MEG of Tom Bearden and many others...

So i am wondering,

You give me a nice picture about lenz law violation but for 1 output?

in textbooks we have two type of systems:

1*open system (no feedback)                                 /// ......and may be we could say no lenz here **ZERO Lenz / the ''impossible'' case**
2*closed system
     2-a/closed system with negative feedback (may we can say lenz law here against us)      /// ....  **negative lenz/ the ordinary case**
     2-b/closed system with positive feedback (here lenz law work for us)                                /// ....   **positive lenz/ the ''impossible'' case

for the moment i thinkof the fist case, so my setup is an open system!
no faraday here because the total change of flux is ZERO! that the idea! i dont know if it work

Best Regards
luc2010

@Mark E

Who says that a spinning mass is either supported on a single point?  Why do
you ignore the gyroscope effect of that spinning object?  These are examples of
why the scientific method is so powerful:  Ideas that do not match the broadly
available evidence don't pass.  What the data says is what is right.  Many times
people do not see the data, see distorted data, and/or misinterpret the
data.

I didn't ignore the gyroscope effect of that spinning object Uhm... that was what I was referring to.

You are in company with Sterling Allan. I find most people are amenable to a
definition of free energy as energy from an unidentified and seemingly
inexhaustible source.  When one uses the same term for the ordinary such as
solar power and the extraordinary:  Say claims of harvesting vacuum energy, one
loses the distinction between the ordinary and extraordinary.  I find that at
best it creates confusion, and at worst it turns attention away from resolving
whether the extraordinary is real or not.

I'm not sure I understand, are you saying different things utilize different energy?. Like I move a ball and thats one energy and I move an electron and well that's a completely different energy...really?, So tell me how many energies are there? Like one or two or maybe hundreds because I have no idea what you could be thinking to be honest.

First you are making an appeal to authority.  Second, you fail both to
identify the authority or their stated position.  You merely conclude that "top
men" offer a position that supposedly makes First Principles malleable.

No, I'm saying there may be people smarter than you or I who may have a better understanding of things which apparently you have a real problem with. However you know everything don't you?, you know everything but you just can't seem to succeed at anything that really matters... been there, didn't work for me.
AC
 

@luc2010
I think Mark E made a good point in his last post concerning your questions.

Lenz' Law applies even if we have just a
single straight piece of wire or a sheet of conductive metal or any more
complicated shape.  All Lenz' Law tells us is that if we set-up a changing
magnetic field and that field intersects a conductor what the orientation of the
induced voltage will be in that conductor.  The source of the changing magnetic
field can be current that we drive through the conductor.  If things worked
where the induced current would act to reinforce the field then just connecting
a battery across a length of wire would cause the current to increase
exponentially without limit.  The current versus time curve would be concave up
instead of concave down.

We can reduce a motor, a generator and a transformer to two parallel wires a couple inches long and Lenz Law still applies, I have done this before. We can add exotic cores, we can wind special coils, we can make it as simple or as complex as we want and Lenz Law still applies because fundamentally the induced magnetic field still opposes the magnetic field which induced it and this is the premise of Lenz Law. You cannot actually say your doing something different and then do exactly the same thing, it doesn't work that way. The action and reaction must fall outside the context of Lenz Law if it is to be truly different and to be honest I'm not willing to show and tell. Your going to have to figure this riddle out for yourself which is actually the fun part in my opinion. You have one induced magnetic field which opposes the magnetic field which induced it so how do you change this?. Obviously we can't have two magnetic fields can we?, I know this makes absolutely no sense but if this was easy then everyone would be doing it. AC

@luc2010
I think Mark E made a good point in his last post concerning your questions. We can reduce a motor, a generator and a transformer to two parallel wires a couple inches long and Lenz Law still applies, I have done this before. We can add exotic cores, we can wind special coils, we can make it as simple or as complex as we want and Lenz Law still applies because fundamentally the induced magnetic field still opposes the magnetic field which induced it and this is the premise of Lenz Law. You cannot actually say your doing something different and then do exactly the same thing, it doesn't work that way. The action and reaction must fall outside the context of Lenz Law if it is to be truly different and to be honest I'm not willing to show and tell. Your going to have to figure this riddle out for yourself which is actually the fun part in my opinion. You have one induced magnetic field which opposes the magnetic field which induced it so how do you change this?. Obviously we can't have two magnetic fields can we?, I know this makes absolutely no sense but if this was easy then everyone would be doing it. AC

If you think you have found a cheat on Lenz' Law, then you are going to have a devil of a time with things like skin effect.

Hi,

i am looking in front of my eyes to a transformer and wondering:

why not using the iron seets core like a capacitor? because iron are always attractive? so the secondery coils are not used in this configuration,

Anyone try this before? or its just a stupid idea?

Best Regards
luc2010