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

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 Members: 83569
  • *Latest: jank

  • *Total Posts: 515095
  • *Total Topics: 15321
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 11

Author Topic: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions  (Read 347269 times)

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3586
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #105 on: October 07, 2014, 08:29:08 PM »
You're coming on a little strong don't you think Marco? Chill out man.  8)

I've not read much of Steinmetz, but yes it is good info.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #105 on: October 07, 2014, 08:29:08 PM »

Offline Qwert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 939
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #106 on: October 07, 2014, 08:31:56 PM »
Snapped
You are all WRONG... 

I see nothing contradictory or wrong in our discussion comparing Steinmetz lectures.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #107 on: October 08, 2014, 02:19:05 AM »
Well, i got some news for yall.

You are all WRONG...  and especially that tinsel twat know it all.
Go ahead, refute anything I've said, with checkable outside references, facts, or demonstrations of your own. Or continue to insult me with empty insults like the ignorant troll you are. Your choice.
Quote

Beginning to understand?? haha give me a break !! your not even close to beginning

Forget everything and i do mean everything you believe and start over.
And don't be fooled by know it all's they know nothing, they think they do but in reality they know nothing.
And yet, we "know it alls" (who don't actually pretend to know it "all" like you do) are able to use our "nothing" knowledge to engineer, build stuff, predict how it will work and see our predictions validated by experiment. Our knowledge allows us to observe, describe, control, and predict reality in a coherent, universally understood manner. Go ahead, forget Ohm's Law and Maxwell's Equations and start over. When you can use YOUR idea of magnetism to design and build a CRT that can display an image... and that is somehow different than the ones we "know it alls" have designed... be sure to let me know. But I'm not going to hold my breath, waiting for you to put your words into actions, because I know that you cannot.

Quote

Charles Proteus Steinmetz could be a good start.
If you really want some answers, Absorb his works, especially the dielectric part and the fibrous part and the part about reflection and once you understand that you will have no more questions, and you can immediately pick out those few that really gained some understanding.
Also it makes things a lot more logical in stead of discussing and speculation combined with learned false assumptions.

Go ahead, Turbo, educate us. Show us something that Steinmetz predicted that isn't completely covered by the standard modern theory of quantum electrodynamics. Be sure to include your YouTube video of the apparatus, and explain fully why the modern description of events isn't adequate or is wrong.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #107 on: October 08, 2014, 02:19:05 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #108 on: October 08, 2014, 02:22:24 AM »
Re the video "the kick".... what is the inductance of 25 cm of #20 solid copper wire? 

By saying "there is no coil" the presenter is implying that what is shown doesn't depend on the inductance of the wire. Is that true, or not? Is it at all possible that there is some capacitive coupling across the insulation of the wire, to his hand?


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #109 on: October 08, 2014, 04:53:35 AM »
Newton II:

Quote
So, when a moving negative charge produces magnetic field, a
     moving positive charge should produce anti-magnetic field.  But it just produces a magnetic field in opposite direction corresponding to
     the negative charge flow.

You are thinking things through.  To me it means you are showing your 'old' way of thinking and then going to the next step.  For starters you show what we can call "crazy logic" with nothing to back it up.  There is no such thing as an "anti-magnetic field," and I am pretty sure that you know that.  So why even say it?  It's akin to making a statement like this, "The North pole is very cold so the opposite South pole must be very hot."  Then you recover because you are fully aware of the right-hand rule.  The right-hand rule is REALITY.  I think it's important for people to resist the irrational urge to accept fake concepts and ideas that people put forward just because they 'sound cool.'  These are important principles in science and how to govern your thinking processes.  The formula for the magnetic field at a given point in space relative to a moving point charge is is attached to this posting.  It's important for people to realize that this formula applies to a point anywhere in ALL SPACE, the Universe.  It's absolutely real and verifiable and people need to understand this.  We have the ability to translate observed reality into a mathematical formula.  That's why we can design bridges and skyscrapers.

Quote
Now think about a sphere fixed with  generator coils which can receive the magnetic flux suitably when magnetic  field is produced on
   the  sphere. Charge the sphere to the full with any type of charge, fix it to a speed motor or pulse motor which developes high speed
   with negligible input energy on 'no load'.

   When you start the motor, the charged sphere rotates and developes magnetic field which varies from zero to maximum.  If you switch
   off the motor and halt the sphere, magnetic field collapses from maximum to zero. In both cases  the generator coils fixed to the sphere
   generate electricity as per induction rules.    A huge magnetic field rising and collapsing, will generate considerable energy in the coils. At 
   the same time the rotating sphere will not experience any  slowing down force from the generator coils because these coils are fixed on
   the sphere and will be  rotating with sphere.

   Hence there will be no load on motor even if you apply electrical load on coils.

   So, you have a generator which generates electricity without experiencing lenz's slowing down force.

Not a chance in the world will you have a generator which generates electricity without experiencing Lenz drag. 

The first thing that you have to do if you want to explore this further is make a physical diagram of what you are talking about and an equivalent schematic diagram.  I read your description and it is ambiguous and lacking in sufficient detail.  That's a classic issue on the forums, talking about a circuit with no schematic, no discussing of the timing of the system, no discussing of the input and output, etc.  It simply doesn't work like that in real life.  If you are up to the challenge then great, or we can just forget about it.  It's your choice.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #109 on: October 08, 2014, 04:53:35 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Newton II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 307
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #110 on: October 08, 2014, 10:29:14 AM »
Dear Milehigh sir,

I appreciate your patience in replying to ignorant questions of ignorant people like me.

An ignorant person may think that head is full of ear wax which comes out of hoels in ears or it is full of mucus which comes out of holes in the nose (nostrils) just like water comes out of a pipe connected to a overhead tank.    There is nothing wrong in the logic.  But learned people like you should tell them that there is brain inside the head and these things come out of some other place.

I feel blessed if you consider me as your 'old' student, take pain in answering my ignorant questions and help me in getting rid of my ignorance.

1) When dirac spoke about 'anti matter' other scientists suggested psychiatric treatment for him. But later his theory  was proved
    experimentally.     When something called as 'anti matter' exists, what is wrong in thinking that corresponding 'anti-field' also exists? 
 
2) Lenz's drag (as mechanical force) comes into picture only when there is physical relative motion between coil and magnetic field. Since
    both coil and magnetic field are rotating along with sphere with no relative motion between them, there is no chance of lenz's drag (as
    mechanical force) in that scheme.   

3) The equation shown in the image - does it refer to a charge moving under the influence of electric potential (voltage) or it applies to a
    charge moving under the influence of a mechanical force also?   Please confirm.
 
    Sun is a huge positively charged sphere rotating on its own axis and completes one rotation in 26 days. Considering  the size of the sun,
    the velocity developed at its outer surface should be very high.    Does  sun  develope a huge  magnetic field  around it due to this
    motion or high temperature of sun prevents it from producing magnetic field?

4) I don't think that a moving charge under the influence of mechanical force developes a magnetic field at all. A rotating charged sphere
    developes kinetic energy due to its mass and not magnetic field.   Only a charge moving under the influence of electric potential
    developes a magnetic field.    Can you please clarify?

5) I don't see anything great in humans building bridges and skyscrapers becuase even birds and insects are capable of  building
    nests/hives to an engineering class just by intuition.  Intelligence in humans is also a form of intuition and they have to thank God for
    giving them that intuition.


             

Offline Turbo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
    • Youtube
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #111 on: October 08, 2014, 12:20:40 PM »
And yet, we "know it alls" (who don't actually pretend to know it "all" like you do) are able to use our "nothing" knowledge to engineer, build stuff, predict how it will work and see our predictions validated by experiment. Our knowledge allows us to observe, describe, control, and predict reality in a coherent, universally understood manner.


You are making a classical error in understanding here and for once i will point you to your error in understanding which is as follows:

To know how to use something is not necessarily the same as knowing how something works.

You can know how to drive a car without knowing how it actually works, as many do and luckily we got many great mechanics and engineers around that do know how a car works..

In dielectricity this is unfortunatly not so.

Yes you can predict how something will work and if you do the calculations correctly it will do that, but it is not the same as knowing what it actually does or how it produces your 'predicted' results there is a distinct difference and when you go into the territory outside of your predictions, your just speculating about what you think or what seems to be the best match according to your specific knowledge.

So in essence you draw on what you have learned and assume it to be correct, but you know verry well as i do that most people havent got a clue when it comes to the underlying phenomena.

That said i like to adress another point RE: The Kick wire
It is a bit sad to see you draw your set of conclusions on that one thing that is shown to you.
Do you really think that was the only experiment performed?
It was not and i think it's naieve to think that.
There were done many, many experiments including those related to 'bodily capacitance'
It is of utmost importance not to imediatly try to explain away something you observe by comparing it to your personal knowledge base simply because if your knowledge base is faulty, so will be your explenation.

In stead try to explain it from what is called the 'know nothing' state and you will receive the correct questions in stead of the faulty answers.

Go ahead, forget Ohm's Law and Maxwell's Equations and start over. When you can use YOUR idea of magnetism to design and build a CRT that can display an image... and that is somehow different than the ones we "know it alls" have designed... be sure to let me know. But I'm not going to hold my breath, waiting for you to put your words into actions, because I know that you cannot.

Go ahead, Turbo, educate us. Show us something that Steinmetz predicted that isn't completely covered by the standard modern theory of quantum electrodynamics. Be sure to include your YouTube video of the apparatus, and explain fully why the modern description of events isn't adequate or is wrong.

Again, I'd say there is a immerse difference between trying to explain something away by modern assumptions and what is really going on it is the most logical step to take the route that fits best but this does NOT mean it is therefore correct error, error.
It is wrong simply because what is really going on does not even come close to what is assumed that is going on how hard can it be to understand the fact that most people are not actually sure about what is going on and there is a rather large chance the applied theory could be wrong, or in the best, incorrect.
Moreover, many 'old' and forgotten experiments show and confirm this but no, old stuff can never be as advanced and correct as the latest ideas, right?
So as a result i would say that the old is even so more correct then the new, which actually shows the direction as to where we are heading.
And i am a pointer, not an educator i remind and point you to your errors and to these facts that once you leave the calculated part you are just guessing and bringing up fancy names doesn't help because they still end with 'theory' which is based on well you know what it means.
Comparing Steinmetz to modern quantum electrodynamics is like comparing a cow to a chicken i am not sure how you would do that.
Also i give you reference to people whom studied these areas of interest with a different view, a view that will force you to re think what you actually know thus by comparing what you know to what they left in their writings your view will be expanded, often in another direction and as a result, you will start to see different pictures, pictures you had not seen before.

I really do not know what to say in stead of the above and i am not interested in this or that discussions i only want the people to know that there are other sources with different probably more logical material available.
The funny thing is that if you go back in history you will find that people were actually closer to the beginning in the beginning but drifted away in the wrong direction so moving actually away from beginning to understand and well ending where we are at today which is basicly knowing how to make it work without knowing how it works its a visual circle actually an endless loop as we call it and unless we go back to fix our errors the questions remain the same. 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #111 on: October 08, 2014, 12:20:40 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #112 on: October 08, 2014, 12:50:13 PM »



 If you could explain what "dielectricity" actually is it would be a great help
  'cause I can't start understanding 'til I can master that one word.
    Many thanks,in anticipation,
                           John.

Offline Turbo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
    • Youtube
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #113 on: October 08, 2014, 02:27:59 PM »
Well John when it comes to the magnetic field we all seem to understand it has a fibrous structure.

Most have seen the magnet + iron fillings or even ferro fluids mark the shape of the field lines.
Mose have heard the Barkhausen snapping noise,
and most know about magnetic saturation. 

But when it comes to the dielectric part they all of a sudden start to speak in terms of 'charge' or 'potential difference'
How many know the actual structure of the dielectric field?
Look at a corona discharge or at a spark or lightning or the crackling noise when you wave your hand over a charged crt.
The dielectric field is also fibrous but it does not paint the same picture.
Magnetic field lines are closed whereas dielectric field lines are open.
What does this say about dielectric saturation?
How many people here work with dielectric fields in stead of endlessly waving coils past magnets, magnets past coils?

You know about the current carrying wire giving rise to a magnetic field, you know what happens to the magnetic field between two current carrying wires running in opposite direction.
But what do you know about the dielectric field that exists between these two wires?
Or between the dielectric (fibrous) field lines between the plates of a vacuum tube?

No then all of a sudden we start to mumble about charges and moving electrons ?  ::)

So if they are both fibrous in nature then why does it have to be particles and charge in one and field lines in the other?
How about we swap them?
Magnetic particles and electron lines?
The magnetic cloud around a (hot) permanent magnet?

Why not just use lines of force for the both of them, closed magnetic lines, open dielectric lines, which have a certain influence on each other.
That's right, drop the electrons, from now it's only moving field lines open and closed forming interference patterns.
What can we do with that?

What happens with a hot piece of iron or magnet? loses strength? holds less field lines? Curie point?
We all know about that right.
The electron cloud around the hot cathode, what does it mean in terms of field lines? we dropped the electron remember.
More field lines? or less what can be said about the existence of a dielectric 'Curie' point?
Who knows ?
So what is assumed to be boiled off electrons, escaped into the electron cloud, less binding force surface electrons etc. may very well be something entirely different but at the same time something remarkably common when compared to it's magnetic lines of force brother, but just having a different pattern.
The vacuum cathode is a bad example just the dielectric field lines between two opposed charged insulated conductors will do.
Because you need  two. why? well open lines remember that means FROM - TO and not AROUND as in closed magnetic lines and that .......could actually mean something.

But they said " it doesn't do anything so let's throw it away".
Little could they know.
And now we are left only with the magnetic part, waving coils past magnets, magnets past coils..

And you are asking me to explain what it actually is whilst i am thinking, if Magnetic is field lines, if Dielectric is field lines, then what about Gravity? Fibrous structure or not? i mean we already got two that are.

I hope that will help you somehow.

There are some good books and videos around if your willing to look for it.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #113 on: October 08, 2014, 02:27:59 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline bboj

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #114 on: October 08, 2014, 02:43:47 PM »
Would you mind compiling a short list.

Offline Qwert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 939
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #115 on: October 08, 2014, 04:17:17 PM »
Snapped
             
These kind of dilemmas require experiments. Since our knowledge does not answer it and even our senses can dupe us: "When something called as 'anti matter' exists". Whatever whoever answers these questions without experiments, it will be only non-verifiable SUGGESTIONS.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #115 on: October 08, 2014, 04:17:17 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Qwert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 939
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #116 on: October 08, 2014, 04:36:02 PM »


 If you could explain what "dielectricity" actually is it would be a great help
  'cause I can't start understanding 'til I can master that one word.
    Many thanks,in anticipation,
                           John.
See/visit my earlier suggestion: amasci.com

Offline Qwert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 939
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #117 on: October 08, 2014, 04:38:39 PM »
Turbo: "Comparing Steinmetz to modern quantum electrodynamics is like comparing a cow to a chicken i am not sure how you would do that."
Examples?

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #118 on: October 08, 2014, 04:43:23 PM »
Quote
"Well John when it comes to the magnetic field we all seem to understand it has a fibrous structure.

Most have seen the magnet + iron fillings or even ferro fluids mark the shape of the field lines."

Sure, and a topographic map shows that the Earth is made up of horizontal layers precisely 10 meters apart.

Turbo, you are pushing the same line of mistaken BS that your puppetmaster pushes.

There is NO "FIBROUS STRUCTURE" to the magnetic or electric field. "Field lines" are precisely defined mathematical entities that are useful for computation but there is no corresponding physical structure that is a "fiber" of a magnetic or electric field.
Iron filings and ferrofluids do not "mark the shape of field lines", they assume least-energy configurations by orienting the long axes of the particles and clumps of particles along the local gradient of the field. People who do not understand the mathematics see these patterns and assume they are seeing some kind of map of "field lines". Sure, and if you pour water into a depression in the ground, the top surface of the water will mark the level of one of the horizontal slices of the planet that a topo map shows you.

And before you make your assumptions about who has done what with what fields, perhaps you should do your homework. Where are YOUR demonstrations of electric field phenomena? Where are YOUR static machines, your "megavolt Tesla coils", your demonstrations and references that back up your silly claims? You are keeping them very well hidden.

Do you see any magnets, coils, etc that are responsible for what is happening here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxEpSX2Hd54


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions
« Reply #119 on: October 08, 2014, 08:15:21 PM »
Fibrous structures is nonsense.  It's just one of many myths and misconceptions that are created on the forums.  How many forum regulars believe that the high-voltage spike from a coil discharging into a high-impedance load "taps into the aether and gets free energy from the aether/vacuum?"  How many believe that if you "chop" a coil with a transistor by shorting it out driven by a high-frequency square wave the same alleged phenomenon happens?

I am willing to bet you that many people believe this.  Many times I have challenged people that believe this to conduct an experiment and show data that confirms their beliefs.  I have never had someone respond to the challenge.  Instead all that I have heard is stony silence.

These are examples of people wanting to believe and therefore "by my wanting to believe in something that must make it true."  It's simply completely wrong.

Then Turbo wants to "reinvent" what sounds like an electric field and calls it a "dielectric field."

Then he and many others pose "thought provoking questions" but never attempt to provide the answers.

Another classic line, "We don't know everything."  Or, "Laws are just ideas proposed by men."  Or, "Laws are made to be broken."

These things just don't work like this in real life.  Instead of rhetorical navel-gazing questions, prove something if you have conviction about a far-fetched idea.  Prove it!  Stop just talking trash with no substance.

We all know where the trash talk can end.  Look at Naima Feagin's trash talk.  It's absolutely grotesque and she is laughing all the way to the bank.

Look at the Akula nonsense.  People were convinced that it was real and worked before they even ordered their PCBs.  It was just another stupid circuit that pulsed coils and did NOTHING.  What happened to the people that got the PCBs and built the circuit?  Nothing.

Akula is just a Russian mental masturbator.  He makes a clip and watches people jump through hoops and watches the video clips that they make and reads the threads that they make.  It gives him a feeling of power.  That's all it is, a nutcase making people jump through hoops for his own perverse thrills.

And rabid believers will actually say in all seriousness that, "Akula was bought out."

Webby1:  Where is Wayne and his ridiculous nonsensical idiocy?  I suppose the answer is nowhere.  He will disappear just like Richard from Magnacoaster.  Both of them sounded like complete idiots when they talked about their stuff.  Yet people wanted to believe.  They are just another version of Akula but instead of running for the Kleenex they ran to the bank.

 

OneLink