Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

movieclipsfree

movie clips free

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 482320
  • *Total Topics: 14218
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 146
  • *Total: 152

Facebook

Author Topic: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION  (Read 9419 times)

Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« on: August 10, 2015, 05:41:23 PM »
.

MY INVENTION   :    A  'LEVITATING-OBJECT'  INVENTION,  that only uses  'Permanent-Magnets' ( No Superconductors ),  and requires  'NO ELECTRICITY'.

______________________

This  invention  is also :

  -  A  NEW-TYPE  OF  MAGNETIC-BEARING

  -  A   Levitating-Object  which can move around a  'Track',  very similar to the  'MEISSNER-EFFECT'  demonstrations  on  Looped-Tracks ,  but mine 'Does-Not'  require  superconductors .

  -  A  Levitating-Object-Display-Case.   For Example,   people could insert the  'Levitating-Object'  into their  model-planes  or  model-cars   and they would levitate in the  Display-Case  or be moved along the  above-mentioned  Looped-Track.   

______________________

HOW IT WORKS
   Very simply,  in the case of a  'MEISSNER-LIKE EFFECT-ON-A-CIRCULAR-TRACK' ,   the  'Magnetic-Track-Surface'   has the shape of 2 O's( or  'O O' ),  so that the field between the  2 O's( or  'O O' ) cradle the  Levitating-Object(  to attract it,  and/or  to repel it ). 
   Although the  'Levitating-Object'  could contain magnets to  attract  it to the 'Magnetic-Track-Surface',  and seperate magnets to   repel  it from the  'Magnetic-Track-Surface',   I think it would be better to have  AN-INNER-CIRCULAR-MAGNETIC-TRACK  to  attract the  'Levitating-Object',   and an  OUTER-CIRCULAR-MAGNETIC-TRACK  to  repel  the  'Levitating-Object',  OR   Visa Versa'   .

_____________________________

HOW MY INVENTION OCCURRED TO ME
  When I realized the reason why my   magnetic-toy-car-invention  would not propel itself along the  toy-circular-track,   I was slightly amazed that one end of the car would just  levitate  without moving,   so obviously I thought to just keep the levitating part of the  magnetic-toy-car,  and turn it into the above invention.
_____________________________

CONTACT ME,  IF YOU KNOW OF A  COMPANY  THAT IS INTERESTED IN THIS INVENTION

   -   john.backerwww@gmail.com
   -   One  Corporation  is interested (  but they require me to sign a  'Special-Document'  with them,  just to talk to them  ),  but I cannot  decipher  their document.
   -   I have filed  Provisional-Patent-Applications  for this  invention.
______________________
 
CLICK ON THE DOWNLOAD LINK BELOW,  TO DOWNLOAD OR VIEW THE   'DOCUMENT I HAVE ATTACHED'   DESCRIBING HOW MY INVENTION WORKS (  it also contains a cross-section diagram  of my  magnetic-circular-track  )
« Last Edit: August 11, 2015, 05:31:26 AM by guest1289 »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« on: August 10, 2015, 05:41:23 PM »

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2015, 07:00:37 PM »
I do not see how you have dealt with Earnshaw's Theorem.  There have been passive magnetic bearings developed that get around Earnshaw's Theorem once the bearings are in motion.  See for example:  http://www.magneticsmagazine.com/main/channels/magneticsassemblies/passive-magnetic-bearing-prototype-testing-results/.


Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2015, 07:50:08 PM »
.

I  have not  built a working model of this invention.  (  I can not build anything   )

I think that the configurations  and  spacing  of the  magnetic forces in my invention,   may get around the problems associated with    'Earnshaw's theorem'.

________

  -  'Earnshaw's theorem'  -   I assume(  'I only assume' ) that  that 'Theorem'  says that  an  object  'between'  two  'permanent-magnets'  will not levitate  'stably'  between   two  'permanent-magnets',   OR,   in the case of  a magnetic-bearing,  that the inner-bearing-object   will not levitate  'stably'  .     
       MY  'LEVITATING-OBJECT'  IS  NOT BETWEEN  TWO  'PERMANENT-MAGNETS',   MY  'LEVITATING-OBJECT'  IS  ALWAYS ON TOP OF THE   'PERMANENT-MAGNET-CIRCULAR-TRACK'  ,   OR,   ON TOP OF THE   'TWO'   'PERMANENT-MAGNET-CIRCULAR-TRACKS' ,      ONE   'TRACK'  FOR   ATTRACTION,    AND ONE  'TRACK'  FOR  REPULSION.

SUITABLE SPACING BETWEEN ALL THE MAGNETS
  -  All the  separate  magnets   in my invention have suitable spacing between each other,  so as not to  interfere  with each other ( suitable spacing between the   magnets  that  are not intended to interact with each other ).

(   MY  'LEVITATING-OBJECT'  can be on top of,  or underneath,  or in any direction away from the   'magnetic-track'  or   'magnetic-tracks'   from which it being  'Levitated'  .

____________________

QUOTE :  ""There have been passive magnetic bearings developed that get around Earnshaw's Theorem once the bearings are in motion""   
               -  I had that idea years ago (  it seemed similar to the overall  'balancing out' effect of a gyroscope ),   but I assumed that I was not the first to think it up,  and that it probably already existed,  and back then I could not find a suitable way to  'claim it as my invention'   .

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2015, 09:07:02 PM »
What have you done to establish that your idea could work?


Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2015, 09:58:14 PM »
Obviously,    I'm relying on anyone interested in this invention,   and the companies I present it to,  to build a prototype,   to prove,   or disprove it's ability to function .

At the moment,  I do not know that anyone has built a prototype of it .

(  Part of the problem has been,  that I had some  big  problems in filing my  'Provisional Patent Applications' ,  and most companies in  the  'European-Union'  won't talk to you until you have been issued a  'Patent Filing'  number,   and I had to fix up a lot of problems with my  'Provisional Patent Applications'.   
    The Patent Laws outside of  the European-Union( US, Canada, Asia etc )  are much better,  they allow you to first  'Publish'  your invention in  'Public',   so that you can  present your  invention to companies,   and if they think your invention is viable,   you can  ask them to properly write and draw your  Patent-Application   ,   and pay the associated costs.   
    NOTE :  I have lost my right to  Patent  my  invention  in  the European-Union,   I already new that would happen when I published my  invention .   But I can still  Patent in the  US, Canada, Asia etc )
    Definitely,  don't start a discussion on  Patent  subjects,  you'll get dizzy and ill.      )

    One big  US company replied to me,  and asked me to  'Sign A Waiver' of disclosure of information in order to discuss my invention with me,  the  'Waiver'  looks OK,  but since I'm not a lawyer,  I do not really know what I would be signing.

_________________________________________

    If anyone knows of any  US  company,  or any company anywhere else ( that doesn't mind I have lost my right to  Patent  my  invention  in  the European-Union  ),    and does not require me to sign anything just to  talk  to me,    then put them in contact with me john.backerwww@gmail.com



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2015, 09:58:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2015, 10:33:38 PM »
If you have not even done hand calculations, then odds are that this is not going to work because it is going to run smack into Earnshaw's Theorem.  As you probably know, the attracting or repelling force between two magnets or in a reluctance gap tends to be very non-linear.  What Earnshaw's Theorem asserts is that you cannot come up with a stable static magnet configuration.  The system will have positive feedback which will either drive the magnets off of each other, or snap together.  You can think of it as trying to balance a marble on the top of a cone.

If you have come up with a way to get around Earnshaw's Theorem or to prove it wrong, then you probably have something valuable.  If you just have a raw idea and haven't done any calculations to check the idea's viability, then chances are the idea doesn't work.

Offline MagnaProp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #6 on: August 11, 2015, 01:46:57 AM »
MY INVENTION
Hi. I'm trying to visualize your idea. Are these images correct?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #6 on: August 11, 2015, 01:46:57 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2015, 02:54:16 AM »
MagnaProp  ,   no,   that's not actually the same as my invention

IN MY FIRST POST FOR THIS THREAD,  I ATTACHED A DOCUMENT WHICH CONTAINS  A   'CROSS-SECTION-DIAGRAM'   OF MY   MAGNETIC-CIRCULAR-TRACK,   BUT,   YOU WILL HAVE TO ACTUALLY CLICK ON THE LINK TO THE DOCUMENT,  TO OPEN IT.

(  But all sorts of different versions and configurations of my invention could exist,   I don't know if yours would work or not )

THE   'MAGNETIC-CRADLING-EFFECT'  OF MY INVENTION IS MORE BASED ON THE WELL KNOWN PRINCIPLE,  IN THE IMAGE BELOW (  PASTE THE  ADDRESS  BELOW INTO YOUR BROWSER SITE ADDRESS FIELD  ),  OR CLICK ON THE LINK

(  NOTE : IF I CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW,  MY BROWSER JUST  DOWNLOADS  THE IMAGE,  AND THEN I HAVE TO CLICK ON THE  DOWNLOAD TO VIEW IT   )

http://overunity.com/6048/using-magnets-instead-of-bearings/dlattach/attach/27840/image//

Hopefully,  the picture will still be there when you go to it 
__________

At the moment,  one of the  other members has been having me a little bit worried about    'Earnshaw's Theorem',   which I'm about the post a reply to ,  BUT,   I HAVE JUST REALIZED,   THAT THAT IS ONLY BECAUSE HE DOES  NOT  FULLY REALIZE THAT MY INVENTION IS BASED ON THE WELL KNOWN PRINCIPLE IN THE ABOVE PICTURE.
 
« Last Edit: August 11, 2015, 05:25:32 AM by guest1289 »

Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #8 on: August 11, 2015, 02:56:45 AM »
.
POST MODIFICATION / UPDATE  :  -  MY INVENTION DIRECTLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM POSED BY 'EARNSHAW'S THEOREM' IN TERMS OF  'SIDEWAYS-SLIPPAGE'  OF MY  'LEVITATING-OBJECT' ABOVE THE  MAGNETIC-CIRCULAR-TRACK.   
        BUT THE FOLLOWING 'PROOF-OF-CONCEPT-TEST' COULD PROVE OR DISPROVE IT'S ABILITY TO  LEVITATE ( ACHIEVE A  MEISSNER-LIKE-EFFECT ) ABOVE THE  MAGNETIC-CIRCULAR-TRACK,  I.E.   TO WORK AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY .

THE FOLLOWING  'PROOF-OF-CONCEPT-TEST',   COULD BE DONE WITH  THOSE  PLASTIC-FOOD-CONTAINERS    'THAT FIT INTO EACH OTHER'  ( such as  plastic food containers for the freezer  )  .
(   THIS  PARTICULAR   'PROOF-OF-CONCEPT-TEST'   WOULD BE USEFULL TO   'MAYBE'  'DISPROVE'    'EARNSHAW'S THEOREM',    AND IT ALSO CONTAINS  A  'CRADLING'  EFFECT,   WHICH MY  INVENTION CONTAINS,  BUT MY INVENTION DOES IT WITH MAGNETS     )

(  Unfortunately though,  these containers are slightly flexible,  so ............  )
_________________

SCENARIO 1

On the   'outer-corners'   of the  'Two'  'Plastic-Storage-Containers',    glue a total of 8 magnets  to  attract  the  two  'Plastic-Storage-Containers'  to each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

(   In this scenario,    the magnets used for  'attraction',  are the same strength as the magnets used for  'repulsion'   )

In the  middle-section of  the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers',   glue a total of 8 magnets( of the same strength as above )  to   REPEL   the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers'   away from each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

In this scenario,  I'm not actually sure what would happen .

________________________

SCENARIO 2

On the   'outer-corners'   of the  'Two'  'Plastic-Storage-Containers',    glue a total of 8 magnets  to  attract  the  two  'Plastic-Storage-Containers'  to each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

(   In this scenario,    the magnets used for  'attraction',  are  'WEAKER THAN'  the magnets used for  'repulsion'   )

In the  middle-section of  the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers',   glue a total of 8 magnets( each magnet being of a  'STRONGER'  strength than the magnets used for   attraction  above )  to   REPEL   the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers'   away from each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

In this scenario,  again,  I'm not totally sure what would happen .

________________________

SCENARIO 3  -   THE SPECIAL SCENARIO

THE FOLLOWING  SCENARIO,    IS DESIGNED TO BREAK THE SYMMETRY OF THE  'DISTANCE'  BETWEEN   'THE MAGNETS ATTRACTING EACH OTHER'  ,     AND,     'THE MAGNETS REPELLING EACH OTHER'  .

For this scenario,   repeat   'SCENARIO 1',    but now either  'INCREASE',   OR   'DECREASE' ,    the distance between         either  'THE MAGNETS ATTRACTING EACH OTHER',   OR,    between   'THE MAGNETS REPELLING EACH OTHER'  ,    BREAKING THE  'SYMMETRY'  OF THESE  TWO  DISTANCES.

In this scenario,  I really cannot work out what would happen.

________________________

Unfortunately,  I cannot even construct the incredibly simple test above.


« Last Edit: August 11, 2015, 05:19:44 AM by guest1289 »

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #9 on: August 11, 2015, 05:40:08 AM »
.
POST MODIFICATION / UPDATE  :  -  MY INVENTION DIRECTLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM POSED BY 'EARNSHAW'S THEOREM' IN TERMS OF  'SIDEWAYS-SLIPPAGE'  OF MY  'LEVITATING-OBJECT' ABOVE THE  MAGNETIC-CIRCULAR-TRACK.   

On what basis do you believe that your arrangement gets around Earnshaw's Theorem?
Quote

        BUT THE FOLLOWING 'PROOF-OF-CONCEPT-TEST' COULD PROVE OR DISPROVE IT'S ABILITY TO  LEVITATE ( ACHIEVE A  MEISSNER-LIKE-EFFECT ) ABOVE THE  MAGNETIC-CIRCULAR-TRACK,  I.E.   TO WORK AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY .

What is the "Meissner-like" behavior that you claim your arrangement of conventional permanent magnets exhibits?
Quote

THE FOLLOWING  'PROOF-OF-CONCEPT-TEST',   COULD BE DONE WITH  THOSE  PLASTIC-FOOD-CONTAINERS    'THAT FIT INTO EACH OTHER'  ( such as  plastic food containers for the freezer  )  .
(   THIS  PARTICULAR   'PROOF-OF-CONCEPT-TEST'   WOULD BE USEFULL TO   'MAYBE'  'DISPROVE'    'EARNSHAW'S THEOREM',    AND IT ALSO CONTAINS  A  'CRADLING'  EFFECT,   WHICH MY  INVENTION CONTAINS,  BUT MY INVENTION DOES IT WITH MAGNETS     )

(  Unfortunately though,  these containers are slightly flexible,  so ............  )
_________________

SCENARIO 1

On the   'outer-corners'   of the  'Two'  'Plastic-Storage-Containers',    glue a total of 8 magnets  to  attract  the  two  'Plastic-Storage-Containers'  to each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

(   In this scenario,    the magnets used for  'attraction',  are the same strength as the magnets used for  'repulsion'   )

In the  middle-section of  the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers',   glue a total of 8 magnets( of the same strength as above )  to   REPEL   the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers'   away from each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

In this scenario,  I'm not actually sure what would happen .

________________________

SCENARIO 2

On the   'outer-corners'   of the  'Two'  'Plastic-Storage-Containers',    glue a total of 8 magnets  to  attract  the  two  'Plastic-Storage-Containers'  to each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

(   In this scenario,    the magnets used for  'attraction',  are  'WEAKER THAN'  the magnets used for  'repulsion'   )

In the  middle-section of  the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers',   glue a total of 8 magnets( each magnet being of a  'STRONGER'  strength than the magnets used for   attraction  above )  to   REPEL   the  two   'Plastic-Storage-Containers'   away from each other(  when one container is being lowered  into  the other container ).

In this scenario,  again,  I'm not totally sure what would happen .

________________________

SCENARIO 3  -   THE SPECIAL SCENARIO

THE FOLLOWING  SCENARIO,    IS DESIGNED TO BREAK THE SYMMETRY OF THE  'DISTANCE'  BETWEEN   'THE MAGNETS ATTRACTING EACH OTHER'  ,     AND,     'THE MAGNETS REPELLING EACH OTHER'  .

For this scenario,   repeat   'SCENARIO 1',    but now either  'INCREASE',   OR   'DECREASE' ,    the distance between         either  'THE MAGNETS ATTRACTING EACH OTHER',   OR,    between   'THE MAGNETS REPELLING EACH OTHER'  ,    BREAKING THE  'SYMMETRY'  OF THESE  TWO  DISTANCES.

In this scenario,  I really cannot work out what would happen.

________________________

Unfortunately,  I cannot even construct the incredibly simple test above.
Why don't you explain why you believe any of these tests should work the way you hope.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #9 on: August 11, 2015, 05:40:08 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MagnaProp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #10 on: August 11, 2015, 06:33:51 AM »
MagnaProp  ,   no,   that's not actually the same as my invention...
I'll give it one more shot. Is one of these it?


Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #11 on: August 11, 2015, 04:28:36 PM »
Yes,      the first picture in your last post(  3_V magneticTrack.jpg  ),      is basically the best embodiment ( version ) of my invention,     although I have not checked the actual poles(  but different configurations of the poles can exist   )

     And,  the concept of your second picture ( 4_V magneticTrack.jpg ),  is also mentioned in my  Patent-Description.

      (  Obviously,   the quality of your images,  is what I should have submitted to  'The Patent Office' in my  'Patent-Description',   but I don't care too much    )

     
   
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 03:50:28 AM by guest1289 »


Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #12 on: August 11, 2015, 05:07:35 PM »
For the member asking how my  invention  could get around   'Earnshaw's Theorem' .

In the worst scenario,  in which my invention could fail,   'IT WOULD STILL FUNCTION'  if it was just functioning on a steady  tabletop,   check the post by  MagnaProp (  Today at 06:33:51 AM ),   and  examine the picture  3_V magneticTrack.jpg  ,   the  'Levitating-Object'  could be pushed  'BY HAND'  around the  'Magnetic-Circular-Track',   like the  'Meissner Effect'  demonstrations on looped tracks. 
    And the second picture    4_V magneticTrack.jpg  ,   may be easier to  manufacture .   
    But Picture   3_V magneticTrack.jpg  could be made out of  numerous  small flat round magnets. 
(  Keep in mind,  all types of different   'magnetic-pole'  configurations  and  combinations  could be used to make this function.   

_________________

However,  my invention is intended to function  'AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY',   and that is where my invention gets only slightly more complicated,  but it is still an incredibly simple invention.   
     It is only in this  'AGAINST-GRAVITY'  functionality  that  I do not actually know if my invention can get around   'Earnshaw's Theorem'.
       To make my invention function   'AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY'  ,   I have described two possible options  :

       1 -  The  'Levitating-Object'  could have some magnets to attract it to a  single-existing  'Circular-Magnetic-Track',   and other magnets to repel it from the  single-existing  'Circular-Magnetic-Track'

       2 -  The second option would be to have  two   'Circular-Magnetic-Tracks',   one  'track'  being used to  repel  the  'Levitating-Object',   and the other  'track'   being used to  attract   the  'Levitating-Object' .

        If no other solutions would work to get around   'Earnshaw's Theorem' to make my invention function  'AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY',    I was thinking of  'SCENARIO 3'  in my post    'Today at 02:56:45 AM' ,  or a  modification  'SCENARIO 3'

______________________
       
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 12:37:19 AM by guest1289 »

Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #13 on: August 11, 2015, 06:08:43 PM »
I should add,   that   'ANOTHER'  way to achieve  a totally   'Non-Electric-Permanent-Magnet Levitating-Object Display-Case',   could be simply to put the  levitating-object  between  a field above it,  that repels it,  and a field below it,  that repels it,    using  the  magnetic-cradle  field designs in my invention,     but my full invention has many more applications than just a   'Non-Electric-Permanent-Magnet Levitating-Object Display-Case'


Offline SoManyWires

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 205
Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2015, 10:21:56 PM »
For the member asking how my  invention  could get around   'Earnshaw's Theorem' .

In the worst scenario,  in which my invention could fail,   'IT WOULD STILL FUNCTION'  if it was just functioning on a steady  tabletop,   check the post by  MagnaProp (  Today at 06:33:51 AM ),   and  examine the picture  3_V magneticTrack.jpg  ,   the  'Levitating-Object'  could be pushed around the  'Magnetic-Circular-Track',   like the  'Meissner Effect'  demonstrations on looped tracks. 
    And the second picture    4_V magneticTrack.jpg  ,   may be easier to  manufacture .   
    But Picture   3_V magneticTrack.jpg  could be made out of  numerous  small flat round magnets. 
(  Keep in mind,  all types of different   'magnetic-pole'  configurations  and  combinations  could be used to make this function.   

_________________

However,  my invention is intended to function  'AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY',   and that is where my invention gets only slightly more complicated,  but it is still an incredibly simple invention.   
     It is only in this  'Anti-Gravity'  functionality  that  I do not actually know if my invention can get around   'Earnshaw's Theorem'.
       To make my invention function   'AT ANY ANGLE IN RELATION TO GRAVITY'  ,   I have described two possible options  :

       1 -  The  'Levitating-Object'  could have some magnets to attract it to a  single-existing  'Circular-Magnetic-Track',   and other magnets to repel it from the  single-existing  'Circular-Magnetic-Track'

       2 -  The second option would be to have  two   'Circular-Magnetic-Tracks',   one  'track'  being used to  repel  the  'Levitating-Object',   and the other  'track'   being used to  attract   the  'Levitating-Object' .

        If no other solutions could be found to get around   'Earnshaw's Theorem',   I was thinking of  'SCENARIO 3'  in my post    'Today at 02:56:45 AM'   

______________________
     

you are onto something there.
i too have questions about this being possible.
one thing that seems to convince me is when looking at how a linear permanent magnet rail gun seems to work.

though this is not involving using magnets to levitate, a levitating bearing system that remains stable enough for a added rotor could be possible to reduce wear and friction.

arrange the stator magnets as shown to work already in linear arrangement this way exactly, though making the proper diameter remain within the passing rotors magnet's( magnet rail guns projectile, projectile(s) now attached to a rotor) angle of approach.

could it be that simple?

or does it need help from either a combination of a few other possible considerations?

such as a clutch that works with a tensioning coil / torque converter that can store the built up force that occurs during the movement past the stators magnets, to help it complete revolutions.

or a flywheel included with the torque converter, maybe a flywheel without a torque converter even.

or electro magnets placed at the right location fed power from the rotation of other sets of magnets passing wire coils that are either attached to the rotor and the stator, to help cancel out the cogging effect that the rails rotor and stator magnets run into.

these things make me wonder.
have not seen any arrangement of magnets anywhere yet that conforms to this concept, yet seen many other different ones.

there is also slow self charging capacitors being developed, batteries that can run for years without needing recharging, and still more than those above mentioned, and combinations thereof.

so if one idea alone does not work, using more than one idea to help make another one possible would make the next logical step before giving up and moving onto something else should any other working proof of concepts become more useful for ones invested time and just waiting to find out if some working design is developed somewhere else.

the goal is to be more efficient than using solar or windpower and be of reasonable build cost.
until that happens, if it happens, these test projects can end up being expensive if no recycled
components are to be found.

a important thing is that the person working on their projects enjoys what they are doing, even if there is no winning the lotto by that person who is making such attempts.

and knows at least just enough about the safety of working around their projects materials!














Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: MY 'LEVITATING OBJECT' INVENTION
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2015, 10:21:56 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: