This is key to understanding various energetic anomalies involving unusual

electromagnetic devices, including Joseph Newman's energy machine and Bruce DePalma's N-

machine.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140113061513/http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1806-11172012000200006&script=sci_arttext// "

**4. Conclusions**We have shown in the present work that, by using the vectorial identities, Eqs. (9)-(11),

it is possible to obtain directly from Maxwell's equations the momentum balance equation,

identifying in it a force density that we have called Maxwell's force density. Robinson's

criticism [9] that this type of deduction is a mere identity does not constitute a

demerit; otherwise we would have to blame also the continuity equation of charge and

current, since it also results from an identity derived from Maxwell's equations.

**It is also clear from this deduction that the usual Lorentz force is an approximation for **

very small charges and corresponding currents, which permits to neglect the self fields.

Therefore the generalized Lorentz force, including total fields, is implicit in

Maxwell's equations. The inclusion of total fields is essential to the study of

radiation reaction. On the other hand such a general result like this must be tested with

particular models and experiments. In this sense is remarkable that the Helmholtz force

density for fluids is contained, as a particular case, in the Maxwell balance equation.

This is a relevant result not appearing in the literature. A final point, relevant for

teaching, is the use of vector identities, not all familiar to students that permit a

straightforward deduction, avoiding in this way the tricky deductions with components

that obscure the deduction and make it repellent to the reader.

" //

The significance of this:

1) The current of a conductor does

**not** act directly on an external magnetic field.

2) The magnetic field of current of a conductor

**does** act directly on an external

magnetic field.

The Lorentz force calculates the force on a wire based on the field strength through that

wire. However, the magnetic field of the current of the wire extends far beyond the

limits of the wire. How this matters is based on the fact that the magnetic field of a

magnet is a function of position. There are different pairs of points on the magnetic

field of a magnet where the magnetic field strength points are mutually opposite in

direction. Since the magnetic field of a current extends to infinity and the magnetic

field of a magnet extends to infinity, then their forces are distributed throughout all

of space. Only a calculation of the forces over all of space, as the spatial integral of

force density, using Maxwell's equations, should give the correct answer. The Lorentz

force is thus not only redundant and can be accounted for by applying a space integral,

it is also inaccurate.

The only reason why the Lorentz force

**should** be used is when it doesn't make a

difference. The reasons why it is

**used** is probably due to the ease of calculating

a single path integral vs. the difficulty of calculating a four-integral that combines a

path integral with a space integral.

In the case of the Newman machine:

There is a range of angles close to top dead center (TDC) where the induced magnetic

field due to rotation of the magnet field of the magnet through the conducting coil is

actually reverse of what would slow down the magnet. To see why, visualize the magnetic

field around a magnet. Then imagine conductors passing through this field.

https://sites.google.com/site/kmarinas86/energy/newman-machine/Newman61.pngAs might be expected in any motor, some of the turns of the coil will have induced in

them voltages opposed to that of other turns in the same coil. If we position the magnet

so that

**more of the lines that cut through the conductor** induce current in the

other direction, the induced magnetic field of the coil will actually repel the

magnet away from top dead center if the magnet is rotating from top dead center toward

the coil, while in the other case, where the magnet moves toward top dead center when it

is already close to it, the induced magnetic field will actually pull the magnet toward top

dead center. The problem with this is that this effect only occurs in a small angle, so

it becomes important to reuse this energy for other parts of the rotation. In addition,

this effect turns out to be very weak, as the peripheral field is less energy dense. So

over the course of a full rotation, the back-emf tends to

**dwarf** the forward emf.

Below is an image of the Newman machine slightly off to top dead center:

https://sites.google.com/site/kmarinas86/energy/newman-machine/Newman70.pngAs I stated, the magnetic field of the magnet does not act directly on a current. It acts

on the magnetic field of that current, and because it may vary in direction in intensity

and direction throughout space,

**the Lorentz force is false** and at best an

approximation. However, a changing magnetic field produces an electric field. It is the

change of this magnetic field (related to the time derivative of the magnetic vector

potential) which produces the induced current. A function is not generally the same as

its time derivative. The forces that drive the relative motion between the magnet and

the wire are technically

**not the same** as those forces that drive the current. The

magnetic vector potential is technically what drives the induced emf. Look at the fact of

momentum conservation. For every force is an equal and opposite force. So knowing that

the force between the magnet and the conductor is essentially at a right angle to the

acceleration of charge due to induced emf, this means the forces between the magnet and

the wire do

**not** account for what happens in the wire itself. Why? Total momentum

conservation requires that all forces must balance. If your problem does not conserve

momentum, then either you did the problem wrong, or there is

**something else** that

exists which balances this equation. In this case it is the magnetic vector potential of

a line of magnetic flux; this does line up on the same axis as the induced current. The

force against (or in this case, with) the rotating magnet, a force which is tangential to

the shaft rotation, cannot account for the force which is parallel to the current, as they

are essentially perpendicular. So the force that drives the current exists on what is

essentially

**a different force channel** than what drives the force between the

magnetic field of the magnet and the magnetic field of the current, a force that acts

perpendicularly to both the magnetic field and the current which produces it.

Below is an image of the Newman machine version with the magnet outside:

https://sites.google.com/site/kmarinas86/energy/newman-machine/Newman43.pngAs far as the N-machine is concerned, you must realize that

**the Lorentz force is **

essentially false (and so is the Laplace force). The key is in finding that the

magnetic field that is parallel with the shaft is not being rearranged as it spins due to

the symmetry of the magnet, so essentially there is no force between it and the magnetic

field of the wire that would cause it to speed up or slow down. The magnetic vector

potential, which is reflected off the electrons and thereby produces a current acts on a

completely separate axis and cannot slow down the rotation of the magnet.