Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. 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

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 515665
  • *Total Topics: 15373
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  (Read 693188 times)

Offline Tudi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #270 on: June 13, 2011, 09:43:07 AM »
   @ Xee:
  All my latest cement beach sand cells produce 55 to 65 mA each cell, not micro amps.
  The last picture in my previous post is of a capacitor can cement cell, it outputs 55 mA, 1.2 volts).  Most of the larger aluminum beer cans output 65 to 70 mA, 1.4 volts.
  These cells will not connect in parallel, only series.  I've gotten over 10 volts from them so far, by using 8 cells.
cooool, so they work forever ? :D Practical :) . Someone mentioned havign 400 leds running forever on earth battery

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline pese

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1598
    • Freie Energie und mehr ... Free energy and more ...
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #271 on: June 13, 2011, 11:07:16 AM »
I agree with this post totally!  I have argued this for years.  Many of my devices have been accused of tapping into man made energy transmissions...but...the radio transmitter has no idea how many radios are tuned in right?  1 or 10,000 still the same output.  So, since I am no scientist I can't really argue where the energy is coming from  BUT, I still call it free energy (Of which I have and use many devices)  I never call it OU.  My earth battery that lights my Christmas lights every year for free (400 leds) is free.  I can run a Bedini motor from it also that charges my batteries for free.  I think of it like solar, not OU but stick a panel outside and you can do useful things with it for free.
 
Bill
Hi Bill,

Over this RF fields i have think years ago .
Following:

Give attention that sensitive world-multiband-receivers have input sensitivity of 0,5 uV
the home-quality-receivers abot 5 uV.  (ON VERY-HIGH OHM LOAD!)
But this voltage WILL RECEIVED ONLY FROM on an very hight ohmic resonance-circuit (made by L/C),
that will come without (nearly) NO POWER losses to FET or other Semiconductor (or tube) amplifiers)

Any low ohm  power tapping in the recervers antenna circuit will only change  the fieldstrengh
of the RF-fieid (coming from from long distance station,.. only some meters around  with
very fast degreasing by distance from this shorted "tuned" circuit (that deliver
no usually power).  I tried this 1950 with best results, so my father and grand-dad
(both e-engineers) was wondering and couldn not explain me.

U know also that directly in front of an /example AM) Transmitter it is possible to lightning
filament-bulbs. with "watt-ages in power". such "Wonder-Experiment" that you find anyway
with LED, Neons, Lightning-tubes ... its nothing, they starting with static fields of near no
power to light.

So please do not so mutch in conflicts if you think "to have or can find" Power. It is´nt.   Most is wrong mesuared  or wrong way calculated
Gustav Pese     


P.S.
SO it make NO DIFFERENCE, if in long distance 1 or 1 Million Radios are tuning on ONE Station.

They are transitting 10KW to MWatts. More "grounding" absorbers suck more power of as all radio receivers that
are tuned over the world to this station.

This is the wrong way.  TESLA have not used "tuned" Herz-ian
waves.  He have spoken out this , if he was asked for his
"arrow electric car".

Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #272 on: June 13, 2011, 03:53:27 PM »
cooool, so they work forever ? :D Practical :) . Someone mentioned havign 400 leds running forever on earth battery

IIRC, the electrodes on the earth battery are not "forever" -- they degrade during operation of the battery.  Isn't that correct?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #272 on: June 13, 2011, 03:53:27 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #273 on: June 13, 2011, 04:34:44 PM »
 I have some further results to share.  I'm working with two capacitors now, 10,000 uF = 10mF each, so a total of 20 mF.  Charged to 2.58V using 2 rechargeable AA's.  I use the caps to run the device until the voltage drops to 1.5V on the caps and note the time t required using a stop-watch.  Thus, I have a reliable measure of Ein and Pin:

E = 1/2 C V**2,  P = E/t,

So Pin = 1/2 20mF (2.58V**2 - 1.5V**2) /t   = 44.06mJ/t

So 44.06 mJ are put into the system, and dividing this Ein by the time, I derive Pin.  The measurements have proven repeatable -- and interesting.
Here are some results this morning:

Basic conditions:
Rb 52Kohms
MPS2222
C-B 151 pF
D red LED
L-B, L-O bifilar 9turns, ferrite toroid 1"OD,  ~120uH each

Ro = 1Kohm
Rr= 0, CSRout = 0 (removed)


1.  With the above conditions, the caps discharge from 2.58V to 1.5V in t = 37.8 seconds, so Pin = 44.06mJ/37.8s = 1.17 mW.
LED dim but clearly visible throughout the run.

2.  Next, I removed the Ro/LED from the system, so current flows back to ground through L1 loop only, t = 37.0 s, Pin = 1.19mW.
  A bit of a surprise, repeatedly, with the Ro/LED out of the circuit, without that load, the input power drain INCREASES.
  A bit hard to explain without OU perhaps, but not sure.  In any case, the power drain through the LED and 1Kohm resistor is small (if not negative ;) )...

3.  So I take the output of L1 and connect it to point 6 (instead of to point 4), so that the return path is through the 1Kohm Rout.   Rout/LED back in the circuit.
Now the LED is extremely dim, but visible in a darkened room.  t= 52s, Pin = 0.85mW.  Pin went down, as might be expected since the current through L1 is impeded by the 1Kohm Ro.

4.  Next, change Ro from 1Kohm to 220ohms.  Same test as in 3, now t = 62.2 sec, Pin = 0.71mW.  Now this is surprising to see Pin go down with Ro reduced, since  the current through L1 is impeded LESS by 220ohms than by 1Kohm Ro -- we are approaching the situation in 1 where the L1 output goes directly to ground.

5.  Back to condition as in 1, but with Ro=220ohms, t= 38.2 s, Pin = 1.15mW (about the same as with Ro=1Kohm).

6.   Next, I removed the Ro/LED from the system, so current flows back to ground through L1 loop only, t = 37.1 s, Pin = 1.19mW.
  A bit of a surprise, repeatedly, with the Ro/LED out of the circuit, without that load, the input power drain INCREASES.  As before.
 

Next I went to my own "replication", with the conditions as in 4 above, and found t=54 seconds (0.82mW), rather than 62.2 s (0.7mW) with the 1st DUT.  So small variations make a difference (not too surprising) -- in particular, the toroid/windings differ in the replication.

Now, this gives us an idea of how the circuit behaves, and a measure of the low power consumption in this device.

I believe this is a reliable way to measure Pin, without the use of an oscilloscope, using capacitors to provide the input energy.  Next I'm looking into means of measuring the output power; proving to be more challenging.  I'm looking at vacuum-thermocouples.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 06:16:50 PM by JouleSeeker »

Offline NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #274 on: June 13, 2011, 04:59:52 PM »
  I am continuing to try different Hartley Oscillators trying to build one that will work with the cement cells small output.  Although I'm getting closer I'm still not there yet, as these hartley circuits seam to draw more than the 50 or 60 mA. that my cells can provide, to light just one led.  I can light a single white led direct off of two of the cement cells, but not through the BWJt, at least not for long.

   Interesting observation: 
   Last night I connected a 3v button cell battery to the capacitor can cement cell that I showed previously, overnight. Then this morning I took the button cell off of the cement cell, and the single red led (connected to the cement cell) is still lit, (3 hours later) from just the charge the button cell gave the cement cell last night, while at the same time lighting an led, all night, and not draining the charge on the button cell charge by much, (1/2 volt).  So, a single cement cell is lighting an led, directly. 
   The point is that there is a good relation between the cement cells as a source of power, capacitors, and other batteries, when all connected together.
  I'm still hoping to find a circuit that will help to take the small power factor from these cells, and increase that, some more.  But, I think that it takes some current, and not just voltage to do so,  I'm hoping to be wrong though, and that 50 mA is enough to start with.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #274 on: June 13, 2011, 04:59:52 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #275 on: June 13, 2011, 05:11:04 PM »
Now with my replication, more results:

1.   I take the output of L1 and connect it to point 6 (instead of to point 4), so that the return path is through the 220ohm Rout.  Rout/LED back in the circuit.
Now the LED is dim, but clearly visible.   t= 54s, Pin = 0.82mW.  (repeat from above)

2.  Connect L1 direct back to point 4.   t= 50.8s, Pin = 0.87mW.   I observed that with this condition, the LED is growing dimmer as the voltage from the caps drops -- until about 1.2Vin, then the LED suddenly gets brighter -- unexpected.  I repeated this experiment and observation.

3.  Place a 220-ohm R in series with L1, then to point 4.   t= 59.8s, Pin = 0.74mW.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 06:17:31 PM by JouleSeeker »

Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #276 on: June 13, 2011, 06:21:54 PM »
  I am continuing to try different Hartley Oscillators trying to build one that will work with the cement cells small output.  Although I'm getting closer I'm still not there yet, as these hartley circuits seam to draw more than the 50 or 60 mA. that my cells can provide, to light just one led.  I can light a single white led direct off of two of the cement cells, but not through the BWJt, at least not for long.....

NickZ -- If you can build my little sj1 circuit diagrammed above, you should be able to draw much less than 50mA. 
My results, stated above, show about 1 mW at approx 2V, IOW, ~ 0.5mA -- a factor of 100 less than your 50mA.

Also, does the electrode degrade over time on your cement battery?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #276 on: June 13, 2011, 06:21:54 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #277 on: June 13, 2011, 08:32:19 PM »
   JouleSeeker:
In answer to your question:  if the cement cells electrodes show signs of erosion? Just the normal oxide coating on the copper and no deterioration anywhere else that I can see.  The picture is of a three month old cement cell that had dried out and showed no voltage or current. It was soaked for a week in tap water, and just now showed 1.2 volts, and 25 mA, each can.  They measure 1.5" by 1/2" in size, and can light the red led that I just tried on it. Electrode is fine on them.
   
    I realize that many are getting very low microamp draws and readings from their Hartley circuits, but so far all the Hartley type Jt circuits have been real joule hogs when connected to these cells. When I connect my various BWJT circuits to an AA battery they light up great.
  How long will your current circuit run on a regular new 600 mA AA battery???  A day? Weeks?
   The only test that is valid for me is that the device self runs, other that that,  all the test data obtained can be very questionable.
  Kooler claims to have run a couple of his BWJT for 5 months.  I'd be happy with 5 days.
 

Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #278 on: June 13, 2011, 08:41:20 PM »
  I can play with the circuit until Pin is quite small, and the LED lights up for longer and longer on the two caps...but I need to get  Pout measured in the best way possible, without an oscilloscope preferably.  I want to check the scope results and develop a reliable method I can do in my home lab.  The goal is maximum Pout/Pin.   Working on that.

Meanwhile, this weekend I have been puzzling over a relativity puzzle.  Also a lot of fun, and a mental challenge.  At a conference a week ago, a fellow posed a question and I've modified it so that now it looks like a real puzzle, in that momentum conservation appears to be violated...  which "cannot happen".
OK, so show me what's wrong.  I like to pose puzzles like this to other scientists, and if any of you have answers, pls let me know.  I admit haven't found an answer yet... and somehow, it MIGHT relate to what we're doing here.  Of course, at present its a thought-experiment, not done physically yet...

Consider two loops of wire facing each other, A and B, 3 cm apart as shown in the attached.  We're going to use the fact that magnetic fields  propagate at the speed of light so that it takes time for the field generated in A to reach B, and vice versa,
t = 3cm/3X10**10cm/s = 0.1 nanosecond (ns) for a field generated at A by a current pulse to reach B. 

Sure, edge effects, etc. -- I'm not worrying about those, yet.

We send a pulsed current through A and (with time delay as shown) through B.  A "positive current pulse" is such that a North pole points to the right, a negative current pulse generates a North pole pointing left.  When the first + pulse goes through A, B is off.  But as the field from A arrives, B switches on with a negative pulse and thus is REPELLED, pushed to the right.  We can end the thought experiment there, with A turned off now and so feels no effects, while loop B (free to move) travels to the right.  There is motion to the right only, which does not conserve momentum... Can you find an error?

But we can go on and get loop A to move also.  The field from B travels back towards A and when it arrives 0.1 ns later, A has a negative pulse and so is pulled to the right and begins to move right.  THAT field from A propagates at the speed of light towards B... which is pushed to the right when it arrives, and so on.
Thus, the whole "system" moves to the right (one can connect the loops on a platform, or a space-ship ;) , with an apparent violation of conservation of momentum...

I haven't found the error if there is one...  let me know why this won't work.  Thanks.   :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #278 on: June 13, 2011, 08:41:20 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #279 on: June 13, 2011, 08:46:30 PM »
   JouleSeeker:
In answer to your question:  if the cement cells electrodes show signs of erosion? Just the normal oxide coating on the copper and no deterioration anywhere else that I can see.  The picture is of a three month old cement cell that had dried out and showed no voltage or current. It was soaked for a week in tap water, and just now showed 1.2 volts, and 25 mA, each can.  They measure 1.5" by 1/2" in size, and can light the red led that I just tried on it. Electrode is fine on them.
   
    I realize that many are getting very low microamp draws and readings from their Hartley circuits, but so far all the Hartley type Jt circuits have been real joule hogs when connected to these cells. When I connect my various BWJT circuits to an AA battery they light up great.
  How long will your current circuit run on a regular new 600 mA AA battery???  A day? Weeks?
   The only test that is valid for me is that the device self runs, other that that,  all the test data obtained can be very questionable.
  Kooler claims to have run a couple of his BWJT for 5 months.  I'd be happy with 5 days.
 

We seem to be posting about the same times, Nick... 
OK -- but when the cement cell is delivering a current, then do the electrodes show deterioration?  you're not saying the cell puts out power "forever", are you?


"Kooler claims to have run a couple of his BWJT for 5 months. " -- do you have a link for that, or do you have the circuit diagram?  that is remarkable all right.

I agree that the final test is a device that self-runs...  and puts out power to boot.  We're all working on it.. ;)

Offline NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #280 on: June 13, 2011, 09:38:50 PM »
  This is the link to Koolers video:  two 5 month running BWJT:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dplIIhCbMcE
   
   Yes, I am saying the beach sand cement cells run....  well forever is a long time,   but they run similar to solar cells.
   My beach sand cells will not add or increase in current when connected in parallel. Each cells outputs 1.2 to 1.5 volts, and 50 to 65mA. and can be connected in series to get the needed voltage. 
   To connect the above BWJT to these cement cells in my current goal.  But it may not be needed as these battery cells can connect direct to the leds, at 4v or 12volts or higher...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #280 on: June 13, 2011, 09:38:50 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #281 on: June 13, 2011, 10:11:04 PM »
Thanks, Kooler...  I appreciate the link.  where is your beach sand cement cell further described?  would appreciate it!

Now back to the relativity puzzle;
Quote
"We send a pulsed current through A and (with time delay as shown) through B.  A "positive current pulse" is such that a North pole points to the right, a negative current pulse generates a North pole pointing left.  When the first + pulse goes through A, B is off.  But as the field from A arrives, B switches on with a negative pulse and thus is REPELLED, pushed to the right.  We can end the thought experiment there, with A turned off now and so feels no effects, while loop B (free to move) travels to the right.  There is motion to the right only, which does not conserve momentum... Can you find an error?

But we can go on and get loop A to move also.  The field from B travels back towards A and when it arrives 0.1 ns later, A has a negative pulse and so is pulled to the right and begins to move right.  THAT field from A propagates at the speed of light towards B... which is pushed to the right when it arrives, and so on.
Thus, the whole "system" moves to the right (one can connect the loops on a platform, or a space-ship ;) , with an apparent violation of conservation of momentum...
I haven't found the error if there is one...  let me know why this won't work.  Thanks.   :)

I can't believe this would work ...
But if it did... following some experiments certainly...

Then, I would arrange the loops (small, short-wire coils probably) into a wheel, and let the push-pull described above generate circular motion -- There's your motor, to drive a generator or a car...  you see where this could lead..  ^-^

Offline xee2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1610
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #282 on: June 13, 2011, 11:23:01 PM »


Consider two loops of wire facing each other, A and B, 3 cm apart as shown in the attached.  We're going to use the fact that magnetic fields  propagate at the speed of light so that it takes time for the field generated in A to reach B, and vice versa,
t = 3cm/3X10**10cm/s = 0.1 nanosecond (ns) for a field generated at A by a current pulse to reach B. 

Sure, edge effects, etc. -- I'm not worrying about those, yet.

We send a pulsed current through A and (with time delay as shown) through B.  A "positive current pulse" is such that a North pole points to the right, a negative current pulse generates a North pole pointing left.  When the first + pulse goes through A, B is off.  But as the field from A arrives, B switches on with a negative pulse and thus is REPELLED, pushed to the right.  We can end the thought experiment there, with A turned off now and so feels no effects, while loop B (free to move) travels to the right.  There is motion to the right only, which does not conserve momentum... Can you find an error?

But we can go on and get loop A to move also.  The field from B travels back towards A and when it arrives 0.1 ns later, A has a negative pulse and so is pulled to the right and begins to move right.  THAT field from A propagates at the speed of light towards B... which is pushed to the right when it arrives, and so on.
Thus, the whole "system" moves to the right (one can connect the loops on a platform, or a space-ship ;) , with an apparent violation of conservation of momentum...

I haven't found the error if there is one...  let me know why this won't work.  Thanks.   :)

Accepted answer is Feynman's virtual photons traveling backwards in time, which I am sure you have studied. Personally, I think this is nonsense. But that is the official explaination.


Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4007
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #283 on: June 13, 2011, 11:43:36 PM »
Hi Steven,

Interesting setup you show.  My first thought is whether a EM field or (to be more precise) rather in your example a "magnetic flux packet" is able to exert a similar force to a like pole when the source is switched off and left on its own?  I am not sure in a positive answer for this.  If I think of loop A as an kind of antenna, then it can sure emit an EM wave and this wave will travel by known laws (believed) valid in practice, regardless of the fact that you switch off the source, i.e. a transmitter feeding a loop  A.  However, to utilize input power for radiation with high efficiency you have to use very high frequency (well into the microwaves) to get a practical loop size for a motor or generator-like setup. I believe nano technology may help here.

Can we ask your problem like this:
  How quickly the magnetic flux field gets diminished to say zero from the moment you switch an electromagnet off? Does it diminish to zero at the speed of the light too?
  And if you launch a pulse into the loop whose frequency corresponds to the physical sizes of the loop (loops mainly work with good radiation efficiency with a perimeter very near to a full wavelength) then you are forced to work in the microwave bands, this is why I mentioned nano technology.

What do you (or anyone else) think?

rgds,  Gyula




Consider two loops of wire facing each other, A and B, 3 cm apart as shown in the attached.  We're going to use the fact that magnetic fields  propagate at the speed of light so that it takes time for the field generated in A to reach B, and vice versa,
t = 3cm/3X10**10cm/s = 0.1 nanosecond (ns) for a field generated at A by a current pulse to reach B. 

Sure, edge effects, etc. -- I'm not worrying about those, yet.

We send a pulsed current through A and (with time delay as shown) through B.  A "positive current pulse" is such that a North pole points to the right, a negative current pulse generates a North pole pointing left.  When the first + pulse goes through A, B is off.  But as the field from A arrives, B switches on with a negative pulse and thus is REPELLED, pushed to the right.  We can end the thought experiment there, with A turned off now and so feels no effects, while loop B (free to move) travels to the right.  There is motion to the right only, which does not conserve momentum... Can you find an error?

But we can go on and get loop A to move also.  The field from B travels back towards A and when it arrives 0.1 ns later, A has a negative pulse and so is pulled to the right and begins to move right.  THAT field from A propagates at the speed of light towards B... which is pushed to the right when it arrives, and so on.
Thus, the whole "system" moves to the right (one can connect the loops on a platform, or a space-ship ;) , with an apparent violation of conservation of momentum...

I haven't found the error if there is one...  let me know why this won't work.  Thanks.   :)

Offline jmmac

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #284 on: June 14, 2011, 12:27:47 AM »
Hi Professor,

This is a bit too much for me but interesting... 2 questions:

- The conservation of moment must happen in 'real time' or is it possible to have delays because of the propagation times?

- In the setup you described and considering only one pulse: that current pulse in loop A produces a magnetic pulse, it travels to B,  induces a current pulse in loop B, the current pulse in B produces an opposing magnetic field and makes B move to the right. Will that opposing magnetic field pulse produced by loop B travel to A and produce a similar effect, moving A to the left?

Regards,
Jaime

[...]
Meanwhile, this weekend I have been puzzling over a relativity puzzle.  Also a lot of fun, and a mental challenge.  At a conference a week ago, a fellow posed a question and I've modified it so that now it looks like a real puzzle, in that momentum conservation appears to be violated...  which "cannot happen".
OK, so show me what's wrong.  I like to pose puzzles like this to other scientists, and if any of you have answers, pls let me know.  I admit haven't found an answer yet... and somehow, it MIGHT relate to what we're doing here.  Of course, at present its a thought-experiment, not done physically yet...
[...]

 

OneLink