# Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

## Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: raburgeson on May 13, 2014, 11:50:18 PM

Title: Magnetic question
Post by: raburgeson on May 13, 2014, 11:50:18 PM
If I take a clockwise wind air core magnet and replace it with a counter clockwise coil will it reverse the poles?
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: MarkE on May 14, 2014, 04:49:59 AM
If I take a clockwise wind air core magnet and replace it with a counter clockwise coil will it reverse the poles?
No.
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: verpies on May 16, 2014, 11:04:36 AM
If I take a clockwise wind air core magnet and replace it with a counter clockwise coil will it reverse the poles?
If by an "air core magnet" you mean a solenoidal coil, as shown below, and the direction of the current that is applied to the ends of the coiled wire does not change, then yes - the direction of the magnetic flux parallel to the axis of the solenoid changes depending whether that wire is wound clockwise or counterclockwise.
See the right hand grip rule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field#Magnetic_field_due_to_moving_charges_and_electric_currents).
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: gravityblock on May 16, 2014, 02:40:38 PM
No.

Another incorrect argument by assertion given by you.  It is now very clear what your motives are here.

Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: Hope on May 17, 2014, 10:03:49 AM
LMAO      Perhaps we have found the troll that lives under the bridge!

Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: Pirate88179 on May 18, 2014, 07:52:04 AM
The poles will reverse only when you change the polarity of the input current/voltage to the electromagnet.  The winding direction alone will not change this.

Bill
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: forest on May 18, 2014, 12:56:27 PM
oh, boy so much confusion....how we could be able to find free energy if we cannot find correct answer for simple question ? no offence, I'm just depressed how much we differ in thinking...
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2014, 02:51:40 PM
Please. I can't believe what I'm reading here. Either there is some misunderstanding about what is being discussed.... or something else is wrong.

I've made a short video. It will take a few minutes to process and upload. Stay tuned.

(Hint: The RHR is your friend.)

Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: Paul-R on May 18, 2014, 03:23:54 PM
Come on, boys and girls.

This does not require the building of a supercollider. All it takes is a bit of wire, a 9 volt battery and a pocket compass from a camping shop. (I suppose a small magnet sellotaped to a lolly stick and floating in a saucer of water would do).
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2014, 03:35:41 PM
Come on, boys and girls.

This does not require the building of a supercollider. All it takes is a bit of wire, a 9 volt battery and a pocket compass from a camping shop. (I suppose a small magnet sellotaped to a lolly stick and floating in a saucer of water would do).

You forgot the two nails and the block of wood. I also included a high-tech termination contact system in my experimental apparatus: two brass woodscrews.

Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: MileHigh on May 18, 2014, 03:37:18 PM
Gravityblock, Hope,

You guys are acting like the trolls right now.  You must realize that.

Here is another thing that you must realize:  MarkE really knows his stuff.  Just look at when he comments on electronic circuitry, he is awesome.  He knows a lot about many disciplines, frankly the man is brilliant.  Everybody on the forum with at least half a brain realizes this, including the two of you.  So why do you two make fools of yourselves?  You are both fully grown men.  Don't you two think that you are going to harass MarkE for "sport."  That's the lowest form of low, shameful behaviour for fully grown men.

And here is the root cause:

Quoting Gravityblock:

Quote
Placing a square around the circle and using the perimeter of the square as a base to measure the distance instead of a flexible string gives Pi = 4.  A perimeter is defined as the length of an enclosing curve.

You have got to be kidding.  Are you out of your mind?  Did you fall asleep in calculus class?  Did your ever take that class?  You show a graphic of a square around a circle and you "remove corners to infinity" and come up with Pi = 4.  That is absolutely and utterly ridiculous and you, as a fully grown man, should not be doing silly immature things like this on this forum.

Quoting Hope:

Quote
I have worked as an electronics engineer for years

Quote
DC transmissions talk about limits due to wire gauge and resistance in the wire, yet how does that change when the same wire is used for AC transmission?   The problem is in the flawed DC theory,  not the wire.   Imbalance creates a need for nature to balance it and she DOES find a way (really many ways).

How does Neuman get so much work done with so little amperage?  So if you are set to think work=amperage then you must justify all your beliefs based on this theory.   Lets admit it,  this box called IEEE training is flawed.  Yet all the believers must rail non-believers and this causes friction here and other (outside that box) forums.

I don't believe that you have worked as an electronics engineer for years based on reading your postings.  If you want to think "outside the box" then go ahead.  But you have to deal with people that will respond to your postings and discuss the merits or lack or merits of what you post without responding with personal attacks, trolling, or harassment.

From what I see both of you make a lot of nonsensical "fantasy postings."  In the vast majority of cases they are unprovable or they defy common sense for anyone with a decent technical background.  I personally don't understand how you can get some satisfaction from doing this.  It's almost like it's a Dungeons and Dragons role playing game but instead is something like "Coils and Magnetic Fields."  The problem is that we are supposed to be looking for real alternative energy solutions, and not fantasizing like children.

My advice to both of you is to start acting with civility and for your real postings put your brains in gear and be real.

MileHigh
Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2014, 04:11:06 PM
Quote
How does Neuman get so much work done with so little amperage?  So if you are set to think work=amperage then you must justify all your beliefs based on this theory.   Lets admit it,  this box called IEEE training is flawed.  Yet all the believers must rail non-believers and this causes friction here and other (outside that box) forums.

What part of "IEEE training" says that  work=amperage ? If you think that "IEEE training" says any such thing, .... then you must justify all your beliefs based on this claim.

So let's see some evidence for your claim that "IEEE training" has now or ever has said that work=amperage.

Pi =4? Please, that's a silly old illustration of ridiculousness. While you are at it..... perhaps you can also explain why the diagonal of a square with side 1 unit actually measures sqrt(2) units, rather than 1 or 2 units as it should according to your flawed "logic". Will cutting diagonally across a park save time over walking the two perimeter sides, since the diagonal is just a chain of tiny steps parallel to the sides of the park? Don't they teach calculus, or even plane geometry, to "electrical engineers" any more?

Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2014, 05:19:22 PM
"Outside the box" thinking is great and necessary. It must still conform to a couple of simple constraints, though. First, it cannot contradict what is already known.... and second, it must agree with experiment.

Let us all please not forget that "inside the box" thinking has produced, for example.... the computers we are all using to communicate on this forum. It has landed semiautonomous robot spacecraft on Saturn's moon Titan, nearly a billion miles distant and years after launch. It has developed artificial kidneys and even hearts.

What has thinking "outside the box", in the sense used above, produced? Newman motors? Bedini battery-ruiners? Garages full of non-working Bessler wheels?

Title: Re: Magnetic question
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2014, 05:28:00 PM
You forgot the two nails and the block of wood. I also included a high-tech termination contact system in my experimental apparatus: two brass woodscrews.