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

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 487553
  • *Total Topics: 14340
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 199
  • *Total: 202

Facebook

Author Topic: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.  (Read 15862 times)

Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #45 on: August 21, 2016, 08:19:52 PM »
    Actually,  I have to admit that I still think that  'Technically'  the  'Disk-Permanent-Magnet' in my question is supposed to be rotated by the electromagnetic-field from the wire.

   I especially think so,  if you place the wire near the outer-rim of the  'Disk-Permanent-Magnet' , like in the  diagram  below .

   Because,  thats exactly how the  homopolar-motor works  :

       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_motor
_____________
  PolaczekCebulaczek

   The  'Faraday-Disk-Generator'( homoplolar-generator ) should also function as a  motor,  if you run DC-current through the metal-disk( a non-magnet ) .

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_generator

     Your Question :
      - So,  what happens when you increase or decrease the DC-current when using the 'Faraday-Disk-Generator' as a  motor,  does the speed change  ?
_____________

    The electric-field ( electrostatic charge ),  and magnetism,  are almost the same thing, intertwined,   this was unified in einstein's theory of relativity( or one of his main theories ).
    The rotating/moving electron's electric-field is basically what the magnetic field is made of,  in a magnet of course the atoms?/electrons? are all aligned in one direction.
     I'm sure there must be all sorts of opposing theories,  because there's no proof for any theory regarding what the magnetic-field is made of.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #46 on: August 22, 2016, 04:07:27 AM »
I see it like this:
An electron that changes a shell level in a gas emits a short magnetic pulse that is in the light spectrum. So an electron that is moving at a constant rate will generate a constant magnetic field.

The moving electron creates the magnetic field but a moving magnetic field does not create an electron but only causes it to move and create a counter magnetic field.

It all seems to come when energy moves in space. So then if mass moves in space, what does it cause?



Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1320
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #47 on: August 22, 2016, 09:19:00 AM »
Nobody seems to be making any headway so I will give you the solution.


We have three scenario's.


1)only the conductive disk rotates relative to a stationary magnet... a voltage is induced.


2)the conductive disk and magnet rotate together...a voltage is induced.


3)only the magnet rotates... no voltage is induced.


Scenario 2 is unique in that we do not need a conductive disk if the magnet itself is made of conductive material. A magnet rotating on axis will induce an Emf or voltage from center to perimeter or vice versa thus a separate conductive disk is not actually needed.


Let's look at the experiments, in scenario 2 when the conductive disk and magnet rotate together we cannot induce an emf unless the field is stationary. There must be relative motion to induce an emf according to Faraday's Law and if the field rotates with the magnet then there is no relative motion between the disk and the magnet and it's field. Therefore the field must be stationary as the magnet and disk rotate together to induce an emf.


As well in scenario 3 when only the magnet rotates relative to a stationary disk we see no induced emf in the disk. If the magnetic field did rotate with the magnet we should see an emf in the disk however we do not proving the magnetic field is not rotating but stationary. This is Faraday's Law...it does not matter how the change occurs (a magnetic field change) only that it does. Obviously the external field did not change in the disk otherwise we would see an emf. Think about that for a moment... the magnet rotates but there there is no induced emf in the stationary disk as we thought there should be but there is an induced emf present. Do you know where?, unfortunately I'm guessing no. I already told everyone that scenario 2 is unique in that the magnet in itself will induce and emf if it is made of conductive material so yes there is an induced emf just not in the stationary disk but in the magnet.


At which point we may address the confusion some have with these scenario's. Some have argued that in scenario 2 when both the disk and magnet rotate together the induced emf in the disk should generate eddy currents and drag. They imagine a scenario where the stationary field of the rotating magnet induces the rotating disk which then generates eddy currents in the disk acting on the stationary field. The scenario where an apparatus "acts on itself" which is not the case here. The stationary field is uniform and when the disk rotates it produces a uniform radially acting emf from let's say center to perimeter. Thus the uniform radial emf cannot loop back on itself to produce an eddy current because the direction of the emf is always from center to perimeter at all points of the disk. This is generally the reason why this seems so confusing to most because they are looking for something which does not actually exist... there are no eddy currents and no drag because the emf is uniform and acts radially outward or inward at all points of the disk. The Lorentz Force dictates that if the field change is uniform and it is then in this case the induced radial emf must be uniform and it is.


Note when only a magnet with no disk rotates there is still an emf induced in the magnet. However there is also no drag associated with the rotation of the magnet relative to the stationary field because no eddy currents or current loops are generated within the magnet. The emf is uniform and can only act radially from center to perimeter or vice versa with no reversal to generate eddy currents or current loops hence all confusion.


Next we have scenario 3 where only the magnet rotates and we see no induced emf in the stationary disk. In my opinion this is where logic and reason should have entered the equation however for reasons I cannot explain it did not. If in fact the magnetic field was rotating with the magnet then by Faraday's Law we must see an induced emf in the stationary disk and yet we do not. Pretty simple concept... Faraday's Law states if the magnetic field has any relative motion there is an induced emf.

In my opinion the worst case scenario is that somehow for reasons completely unknown to me some believe the magnetic field has induced a massive emf in the external wires closing the circuit. However they forgot a few simple laws found in every high school textbook. One is the inverse square law and in a homopolar generator with two magnets and a conductive disk in between there is basically no external field thus no appreciable field to cut or more so induce any external conductors. Again we have a major flaw in logic and reason of epic proportions. If there is no external field to induce the external conductors then how exactly could any emf be induced?... obviously this theory it is completely absurd.


This is basic grade school science, Faraday's Law, and then someone introduced a variable which caused everyone to lose their mind... I'm not sure what the problem is here.


AC

Offline lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #48 on: August 22, 2016, 07:53:48 PM »
@AC
How many different conditions are there?

Did you include rotating only the external conductor with magnet and disk stationary?
Did you include rotating the disk and external conductor with only the magnet stationary?

What are the results?







Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2016, 12:03:01 AM »
allcanadian
   I don't even know if  'my own'  question belongs in this thread.
       I will be re-reading that last post a few times,  to try and understand it all .
________

   In accordance with what PolaczekCebulaczek and citfta said,  the DC-Motor in the animated-diagram below,  should not rotate( with or without commutation ),   if the 2-magnets were replaced with 1-ring-magnet

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ejs_Open_Source_Direct_Current_Electrical_Motor_Model_Java_Applet_(_DC_Motor_)_80_degree_split_ring.gif   

   (  NOTE : In this animated-diagram,  I can only see that the  electromagnetic-fields  from the relevant sections of the rotating-wire,  are actually  'Parallel'   to the  Magnetic-Field occurring between the 2-permanent-magnets,   instead of being   'Perpendicular'   ? ,     that has given me more possibilities for my own question    )

   SO,   'if'   that DC-Motor would rotate inside of a  ring-magnet,  then,  the ring-magnet could be the rotating-component in that DC-Motor,  which means that the  Disk-Magnet  in  'my-own' question should rotate.
________

  The thing I can't understand is when current is passed through 'Permanent-magnets',  which seems to be done in some homopolar-motors,  unless I'm wrong.
_______

   The 2-scenarios in the  diagram below  -  Is it true that no rotation will occur in both scenarios,  if no current is allowed to flow through the permanent-magnets in that Faraday-apparatus(  if the permanent magnets were sealed in glass/plastic ) .

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Faraday_magnetic_rotation.jpg
       
    I'm sure that rotation would still occur,  but I assume I'm wrong

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2016, 12:03:01 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1320
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2016, 01:56:48 AM »
@lumen
Quote
How many different conditions are there?


There are as many results as there are experiments.
Quote
Did you include rotating only the external conductor with magnet and disk stationary?


If the rotating external conductors are in close proximity to the magnetic field then the conductors are similar to the rotating disk/stationary magnet scenario. It should give a similar result even though many may believe it is different. However now we have introduced different emf's being induced along different sections of conductor dependent on the field magnitude and direction. Why would anyone complicate the experiment with a ridiculous number of variables they do not understand and then presume they do?.


Quote
Did you include rotating the disk and external conductor with only the magnet stationary?


I'm not sure why I would because we have now introduced multiple variables which obscure the result rather than clarify it and clarity is what we want isn't it?.


Quote
What are the results?


There in lies the question and questionable experiments always yield questionable results. If a we take all the complications and distractions out of the equation and rotate only a magnet with no separate disk we get better results. So how is it a magnet can rotate and induce and emf if the field is rotating with the magnet?. It is not the external conductor I can tell you that because the inverse square law disqualifies that premise. You mean to imply the most powerful Faraday generator I have heard of producing 500 MJ wasn't actually inducing the disk but the external conductors... really?.


AC

Offline lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2016, 04:33:41 AM »
@AC

Magnetic fields are not stationary in space, how could they be?

If they were stationary then radio waves could not propagate or bounce off things and change direction and the fact that the earth is moving in space (not just orbiting) would cause the magnetic waves to stretch in some direction as they are left behind.

Rotating your magnet above an aluminum plate is NO different than rotating the aluminum plate above the magnet. It's simply a matter of how it's viewed.

I know the results of my tests and can say that without the external conductor your rotating disk will generate no current.  How can you even check it without the external conductor?

This thread is actually talking about two different experiments, a rotating charged disk and (totally different) a rotating magnet or disk in a magnetic field.
One generates a magnetic field and the other generates a current flow.

With the help of an electroscope, it may be possible to detect charge movement due to the rotating magnetic field and never touch the magnet or disk.
That is the real question!





Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2016, 04:33:41 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline PolaczekCebulaczek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 99
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2016, 07:32:05 AM »
Hi guyz

I just performed an cruel experiment:

I wrapped a coil around plastic pipe (thin wire a lot of turns) and put stack of neodymium cylinder magnets inside the pipe (pipe was not much bigger from magnets - everything is tight)
I connected multimeter to coil and set scale to milivolts, I have placed everything on rotating office chair and spun the chair( coil with magnets is in vertical position in the middle of chair)
while rotating chair no voltage is detected on mulitimeter
does i need a lot of RPM to see something? I don't think so.
I also tried this setup with cylinder ceramic magnet from speaker instead of neo, still no voltage.
it seems that field DOES rotate with magnet?

does earth magnetic field is rotating with planet? iF so then where is the induced E field ?

now time for electronic electroscope experiment...


Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1320
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2016, 05:57:42 PM »
@lumen
Quote
Magnetic fields are not stationary in space, how could they be?[/size]


As I said an oscillating cork in water can produce a radial wave field however the wave field does not rotate with the cork. The wave field moves with the source however it does not rotate on axis with it. The medium in which the external field exists is distinct from the source which created it. In essence all we need to understand is that the cork is not the same as water, water is not the same as a cork...they are different. This is in fact a phenomena found everywhere in nature and it exists for obvious reasons.


You cannot seem to grasp this simple concept so let me explain it for you. Take a simple magnet in your hands then move it around... observe the results. Now do not move the magnet but only rotate it on axis...observe the results. What are your results?... well when you moved the magnet the exterior of the magnet moved relative to the surrounding space and when you rotated the magnet on axis it did not move relative to the surrounding space. Thus we can conclude moving and rotating on axis are different forms of motion. They are not the same-same, they do not produce the same-same results because they are different.


The only fact of relevance here is that when a magnet rotates on axis it "WILL NOT" induce an emf in nearby conductors including a conductive disk. However when the conductor moves in any way... I repeat any way, then an emf will be induced. This is the heart of Faraday's Paradox which you seem unwilling to address.


Quote
If they were stationary then radio waves could not propagate or bounce off things and change direction and the fact that the earth is moving in space (not just orbiting) would cause the magnetic waves to stretch in some direction as they are left behind.


Now your speaking of two completely separate phenomena, 1) a static field moving/rotating and 2) a rapidly changing magnetic field producing Electro-Magnetic waves.
Quote
Rotating your magnet above an aluminum plate is NO different than rotating the aluminum plate above the magnet. It's simply a matter of how it's viewed.


The experiment proceeds in three steps:
1) The magnet is held to prevent it from rotating, while the disc is spun on its axis. The result is that the galvanometer registers a direct current. The apparatus therefore acts as a generator, variously called the Faraday generator, the Faraday disc, or the homopolar (or unipolar) generator.
2) The disc is held stationary while the magnet is spun on its axis. The result is that the galvanometer registers no current.
3) The disc and magnet are spun together. The galvanometer registers a current, as it did in step 1.


Actual experiment would disagree and rotating a magnet above an aluminum plate does not induce an emf in the plate. On the other hand rotating the aluminum plate above the magnet does induce an emf in the plate which is in fact Faraday's Paradox experiment. In essence you have just contradicted experimental evidence everyone knows to be true. Obviously it is different otherwise we wouldn't have a paradox would we?.


Quote
I know the results of my tests and can say that without the external conductor your rotating disk will generate no current.


I would agree and a closed loop circuit is required for a current to flow however a closed loop is not required for an emf to be induced. In which case you have simply stated the obvious... a current cannot flow if there is no closed loop circuit. It is important to remember the Electro-Motive Force is the Force which causes charges to move and when charges move in closed loops we call this an electric current.


Quote
How can you even check it without the external conductor?


It is actually quite easy and when charges move the charge density changes between two regions. This differential charge density is measured as a voltage or an electric field. If there is a measurable electric field which we can measure from a distance with an electroscope then we know some charges have in fact moved.


Do you know what I find most fascinating about the Faraday Paradox?. It is not the experiment in itself because it seems pretty straight forward. It is that most people will go to almost any length and say almost anything to prove it wrong but very few if any have the strength and integrity to prove it is right.


No offence but from your posts I think you would do almost anything to prove this experiment wrong and you simply cannot accept it. You will not rest until you have convinced yourself it must be wrong in some way and your beliefs relating to popular opinion are right. This is exactly the wrong attitude in my opinion and I just don't care either way, I just want to know the truth...period.


AC






Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2016, 06:04:58 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2016, 07:40:57 PM »
@AC

Faraday's experiments are 100% correct for the three parts that were tested. It's only the paradox conclusion that is wrong.
If one takes the incentive to perform additional tests one will find there is no paradox and the Faraday generator relies on the very same basis as all generators.






Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #56 on: August 25, 2016, 06:01:12 AM »
  Since there's no proof contradicting Faraday's paradox,  it can only be correct,  the field around a permanent-magnet is stationary (  easiest to see in a rotating-disk-permanent-magnet ) .
_______

    But it's still useful to try and disprove Faraday's paradox, or find any errors in it,  etc .
_______

    If the metal-disk that spins next to the disk-magnet( in the Faraday paradox ) was made of  iron,  instead of aluminium,  then I would state the possibilities of the following ( assuming the probe/conductor used for detecting current, is only set up to detect current in the iron-disk ) :
     ( 1 ) - when the disk-magnet and iron-disk spin together - the disk-magnet has turned the iron-disk into a temporary-magnet,  so the  iron-disk is somehow causing a current to be generated in relation to itself and the  probe/conductor used for detecting current,   maybe like a pump,  pushing electrical current .
     ( 2 ) -  but when only the disk-magnet spins,  and the  iron-disk  stays stationary,  then the iron-disk cannot do whatever it was doing with the probe/conductor used for detecting current,  in situation  number ( 1 )
     ( 3 ) -  when only the iron-disk rotates, and the disk-magnet stays stationary,  then that iron-disk is still a temporary-permanent-magnet like in  situation  number ( 1 ),  so it will do the same as   in situation  number ( 1 ).
__________

    I think there may be a  'definitive' test that would 'Not'  involve detecting current in disks using conductors or brushes.

   This 'test' is based on something mentioned in one of the previous posts,  simply stating,    that a current will be generated in a  disk-permanent-magnet  rotating on its own axis,  because the stationary-magnetic-field  of the rotating  disk-magnet,  will induce/generate a current in the rotating magnet.
   (  I can't find that in previous posts at the moment,  but I assume it's correct  )

   The test would be that an  un-commutated  central rotating component of a DC-motor,  would rotate inside of a ring-permanent-magnet,  and the RPM of that,   would be compared to the RPM of just letting the  ring-permanent-magnet rotate,   keeping in mind that the ring-permanent-magnet would experience friction against it's own magnetic-field,  when it is rotating,  but not when it is not rotating.
    (  The problem is that the central rotating component of a DC-motor,  and electromagnet,  would 'may' also have friction with it's own stationary-magnetic-field when it is rotating,  in a way I can't visualize .  )

    - Obviously this test would have to be done in a high-vacuum,  and / or components shielded or designed to eliminate air-drag .
_______

    So Faraday's paradox should not function sufficiently far away from the universe,  where there is insufficient medium for a magnet to generate a magnetic-field .
_______

   However, what about putting JUST the  disk-permanent-magnet rotating on it's own axis,   in a very-very fast flowing current of water( containing a sugar content like grapes, diamagnetic ) to try and reduce it's magnetic-field,    if there's no decrease in current produced by simply  rotating  the disk-permanent-magnet  on it's own axis,  it could mean that THE CAUSE OF THE CURRENT GENERATED,   IS THE EFFECT OF THE ROTATING DISK-MAGNET ON THE  PROBE/CONDUCTOR USED TO DETECT CURRENT.
   -  Some type of Ferrofluid  could also be an alternative for this test .


Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #57 on: August 25, 2016, 06:48:10 AM »
   This is an update to the post I just posted ( I'm doing it as a another post so as not to alter the time-stamp of the post I just posted ).
________

     That scenario I describe of replacing the aluminium-disk,  with an iron-disk.
       -  That scenario could possibly still apply to an aluminium-disk,  via a different way,  because when  the disk-permanent-magnet causes current to be generated in the  aluminium-disk, it is also turning that aluminium-disk into an electromagnet.

    NOTE : Basically,  what I'm saying about the iron-disk( or the aluminium-disk ),  is that the cause could be the rotation of the  iron-disk( or the aluminium-disk ) in relation to the stationary probe/conductor used to detect current in the iron-disk( or the aluminium-disk ),   
      -  I haven't thought about it 'if' the probe/conductor used to detect current in the iron-disk( or the aluminium-disk ),  also rotates together with the iron-disk( or the aluminium-disk ).
__________

    WHAT ABOUT :  In regard to simply having a  disk-permanent-magnet  rotating on it's own axis,  and measuring the current generated in the rotating  disk-permanent-magnet  from it's own STATIONARY-MAGNETIC-FIELD.
      -   What about if you have 3-disk-permanent-magnets evenly spaced along the same shaft( the magnets are physically fixed, glued to the shaft ),  and orientated so that they would clank together if it wasn't for the spacers SLIGHTLY separating them apart on the shaft, 
       -  NOW,  rotate the shaft/the magnets,  would it affect the current induced in the MIDDLE-disk-magnet,    IN COMPARISON,    to if the  MIDDLE-disk-magnet  was the only magnet on the shaft  ?
           (  The shaft should be plastic, or wood  )


      AND ALSO,  what about having 2 ( or 3 ) disk-magnets contra-rotating against each other on the same shaft, you figure the rest out.
     

Offline PolaczekCebulaczek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 99
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #58 on: August 25, 2016, 01:47:07 PM »
guest1289 i like your thinking ,but what about experiment that i have performed with coil, magnet and multimeter placed on rotating office chair? no brushes, everything just rotates and no current detected,  by looking at results - it seems that field does rotate with magnet on axis.


Offline lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #59 on: August 25, 2016, 04:10:38 PM »
guest1289 i like your thinking ,but what about experiment that i have performed with coil, magnet and multimeter placed on rotating office chair? no brushes, everything just rotates and no current detected,  by looking at results - it seems that field does rotate with magnet on axis.

I agree that it is more likely that the field does rotate with the magnet but there is much more going on in the chair experiment to confirm it for certain.
Consider that the field is a loop from one pole to the other and any conductor would in fact be passing through the field in both directions. So any movement through the field generates a canceling charge from the same field passing through the conductor in the opposite direction and provide zero current.

If an electroscope could detect a charge displacement from a spinning magnet without contact and also detect a change in rotation direction, then the results would be more conclusive that the field rotates with the magnet. One could also rotate the electroscope to detect the stationary field in the same manner.


Also: to protect the gate of the mosfet you can use two zener diodes back to back in series to limit the gate voltage to the zener voltage. +-10v should be good.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #59 on: August 25, 2016, 04:10:38 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: