Hi GB,

I guess my only issue, is that I do not see the magnetic fields rotating, at all, even though the magnets of course, are.

If a moving charge induces a magnetic field, then the magnetic field will move with the charge.  Instead of saying, a magnetic field does or doesn't rotate with the magnet, we should say, a magnetic field moves with its source (charge). In the case of a magnet, each charged particle is its own source of magnetic field energy. When the effect of each charge is considered separately, the proper operation of the Homopolar Generator is revealed without violating Einstein’s Relativity.

For simplicity, we do not have to consider each individual charge, we can instead group together charges with similar velocities as a component of charge motion. Then resolve each component of charge motion separately and then sum the results to arrive at the final answer.

One component of magnetic field is produced by the mobile carriers and the other component from the stationary charges. These two magnetic field components produce equal and opposite effects thus canceling any added effect due to the rotation of the magnet.  In the "new magnetism" book on Pages 68-73, it talks about the Faraday Paradox and should clear up this issue of "does the field rotate with the magnet or not", http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=383

Anywho, just how I am picturing it right now, if that is even correct.  Have you built that description of yours and taken some measurements?  I would love to see some pictures or video if you have any, as well as a log of your measurements.  Thanks!

Cheers,

Bruce

I have taken measurements, but not of the designs I have been talking about because they have not been built.  Below is a design of a brush-less system based on two Halbach Arrays, or a radial magnet.  Please note, if axial magnetized magnets were used, then there would be no EMF generated because the only thing rotating in these designs are the magnets (this does not work with axial magnetized magnets rotating on their magnetic axis when their is no relative motion between the disc and external circuit, as you are fully aware of).  This is the reason for the Halbach Arrays and the radial magnets.  These designs are not based on relative motion between the disc and external circuit.  They are designed around "charge motion" and the directions of the EMF.  The book, "New electromagnetism" is in agreement with these designs, but these designs were not initially designed around that model.

In a 3d view, the magnets will be inside a copper shell, and this copper shell is completely containing the magnets.  The magnets will be rotating inside this stationary copper shell.  I have less complicated designs without the Halbach Arrays by using multiple axial magnetized magnets/discs rotating together with a stationary external circuit, but they will need slip rings on the axle.  I'm sure these designs will work, or at least a variation of them with slight modifications......but the question is, will they still have a counter torque.  The voltages will be higher in these designs.

GB

EDIT:
Receive a message that the pdf file is in need of repair, and it would not download.  If you could put a link to it here, or reload it, it would be appreciated, GB.

I originally downloaded that pdf article from, http://www.distinti.com/docs/nm.pdf

I'm using Linux and my pdf viewer doesn't have any problems with the file I uploaded, but I did receive an error message about this same file when I tried to upload it earlier to Scribd.com.  If you have any problems with the pdf in the above link, then please let me know.

This page has all of the publications based on the model of "new electromagnetism", http://www.distinti.com/docs/

These articles are a very good read and I think you will find them interesting.

GB

You'll love this publication on Faraday's Final Riddle, and I uploaded it to Scribd so you can view it on-line (you can always download it if you like),  http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043991/Faraday-s-Final-Riddle

Does the Field Rotate with a Magnet? by A. G. Kelly.

This paper gives a description of a series of novel experiments on the relative motion of conductors and magnets.  In the Conclusions of this publication on page 16, it says, "Faraday's Law of electromagnetic induction is true only in particular circumstances. As is known, a separate analysis is required for Motional Electromotive Force. This paper provides the basis for such a general rule."  This is the reason why my designs require a separate analysis, because they are based on "charge motion" and the directions of the EMF.  This publication, also supports the concept of my designs.

[Edit:]  @Bruce:  I'm not trying to steer you away from your own experiments in order to test my designs.  Hopefully, some of the information I'm posting will be beneficial or be useful for your own experiments, either now or in the future.  I'm still interested in the pancake coil and look forward to your results.

GB

Hi GB,

Your are correct, I did indeed LOVE that pdf.

You know, it had me thinking... If simply the disc is cutting a the field lines one time, and this is generating the voltage on the disc, could not a series of discs (ie..my tesla pancake coils) be stacked, electrically seperated by perhaps paper?  This could drasticly increase power out, if very thin discs were used (ie..the disc method)??  Your thoughts on this?  Of course as long as the magnetic field strength was strong enough to produce a voltage at the far end, or one could sandwich it between the two magnets in attraction.

I also learned something, for I was under the impression that the disc(coil) had to be sandwiched between a north facing and south facing magnet to produce any power.  This is not the case.  As long as simply one end or the other of the magnet is facing a disc...this means that there should/can be many more spots added to my BRUNG device in which I can take off power, for future experiments.  I LIKE that!

Hi Everyone,

My glue is set and my backing is now complete.  It is totally movabe, until I find the exact place distance it will need to be at for the levitation of my device.  I used ceramic glazed tile, because it is like glass.  Smooth with very little friction for the pen tip.



Cheers,

Bruce

I agree, a series of discs/coils should increase the power output, and you are correct about the discs/coils not needing to be sandwiched between opposite poles.  Just take note of the direction the field is pointing in, relative to the disc, and the direction of rotation. 

You should take measurements of the disc facing opposite poles, and changing the rotation direction.  I think you will be surprised that both discs will have the same polarity in a, "disc/N/S/disc" setup (you probably won't agree with this until you take measurements).  Also, both discs will have the same polarity in this setup, disc/S/N/disc, but will be opposite in polarity to the discs in the previous configuration.  The polarity of the disc will be opposite in a N/S/disc/N/S configuration, than a S/N/disc/S/N setup.  Changing the direction the field is pointing in relative to the disc, will reverse the polarity, and changing the direction of rotation will also change the polarity.

GB

Got it!  Good stuff, GB, thanks!

Cheers,

Bruce

Hi GB,

I am quickly deciding not to go this "super mini route".  I want to do some real testing and really focus my energy on this project, when I conclude my SSG3 experiments.  Trying to wind 20 mini pancake coils is ridiculous and I'd rather just build a large one, and really wind some nice pancake coils, as well as bifilar, to test.  I am going to stack them, one on top of the other.

My question for you, is the following:  If I wanted to use 8" magnets, could I not use an 8" piece of thin steel for the front, place several strong N52 Magnets, all north facing to the steel plate, epoxy them in place and add a thin steel backing.  Or... must it be a true 8" magnet that is rotating on it's axis?  (ridiculously priced, as you can imagine).

If you think my first way will work, please let me know why, and if you have any knowlege of anyone trying this?  Thanks!

Cheers,

Bruce

Bruce, I just realized, with my method you would still need to use 20 small pancake coils, and you want to use just a single pancake coil.  It would work with a solid disc that could wrap around half the length of a long cylinder magnet being formed by stacking many magnets together, but you can't wrap the pancake coil around the length of a long cylinder magnet.  The nickel coating on the neo magnets can replace the solid disc, so it's not a problem to stack many neo magnets together to form a large cylinder magnet/disc, then extract the current with an external circuit between the axis and at half the length of the cylinder at the periphery.  This increases your voltage and is the same as having a larger diameter magnet/disc.

Placing several magnets on the back of an 8 in. steel piece so you can use 1 large pancake coil is an excellent idea, but i'm not sure of the results.  The field will need to be uniform in all directions between the center and outer edge of the circular steel piece.

I will give this more thought, this is a good question.

GB

Hi GB,

I have drawn it out crudely, to make sure you understand what I am meaning...

Thanks!

Bruce

EDIT:
Based on the thickness of wire, etc, I figure I can put about four (4) pancake coils between the magnets.  If it will work, or must it be a "single" magnet, rotating on it's axis??

I can't say if it would work or not.  It's an interesting concept.  I will run some quick tests on Monday to test this idea.  I don't think it needs to be a single magnet, as long as the field is uniform.  The domains of the steel should be aligned with the field of the magnets to create an uniform field between the steel plates.

GB 

Bruce.
i think the steel plate will never become North polarity this way. Also not wuth an single magnet (this way)
 
Gustav Pese