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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy  (Read 3500965 times)

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4860 on: July 19, 2015, 02:29:22 PM »



  I want to try and find out if anybody is good at physics.
What I want to know is with the Pluto mission would the clock
on board have"lost" time compared to here on earth.
If the thing went at 16.316 km/sec and there were 10 years
worth of seconds what would happen?
         John.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4861 on: July 19, 2015, 02:30:57 PM »
If we have a set input energy that remains the same in both test,and yet we get a higher energy output from the second test simply by adding a PM,-if not from the PM,then where did the extra energy output come from?as the only change between the two test is the addition of the PM.
Ah but you don't.  The mistake that you make is that you are evaluating a continuous power level where most of that power*time integrand is spent heating the wire in your electromagnet, dwarfing the energy that it took to magnetize.  It is the energy that goes into the magnetization that you want to know but are not measuring.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4862 on: July 19, 2015, 02:37:42 PM »
Ah but you don't.  The mistake that you make is that you are evaluating a continuous power level where most of that power*time integrand is spent heating the wire in your electromagnet, dwarfing the energy that it took to magnetize.  It is the energy that goes into the magnetization that you want to know but are not measuring.

Ok,lets do it ass about.
We want to achieve say a 10 Lb pull force on that spring. With the ferrite block in place,we may need say 12v @ 2 amp's applied to our electromagnet to achieve such a force. We then replace that ferrite block with a PM of the same size,and we now find that we need only apply say 6V @ 1 amp to achieve the same pull force on that spring. So the work done against the spring is the same,but we need only apply half the energy to that electromagnet to achieve the same work done.

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4863 on: July 19, 2015, 02:47:53 PM »
There is law about conservation of energy.There is no law about conservation of work.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4864 on: July 19, 2015, 02:52:59 PM »
The electromagnet fields strength remains the same.
This dose not answer the question posed in my test.
Hopefully these timing diagrams will help make the situation more clear.  The energies that we are interested in are the: energy in the spring which you qualitatively have, and the energy needed to get more or less energy into the spring.  Over any significant period of time the energy that is going into the electromagnet is going to asymptotically approach:  V/RWINDING*T.  But once the magnetic field has been established (and the spring has stabilized) there is no more energy being added or removed from the spring.  The work that goes into the spring comes from establishing the magnetic field.  Because we don't have superconductors, we are then stuck feeding the I2R losses of the winding.

In the drawing below you can see that the forces are different using:  a ferrite keeper, or a PM aiding or bucking the electromagnet.  The current profile and therefore power and energy up to the point the magnetic field stabilizes is different for all three cases.  So: literally all you have done is to set up a situation with a stronger magnet, and it takes more energy to magnetize it.  There is a component of work that is also performed moving the PM into place.  The experiment does not measure the electrical energy used to magnetize, or the work performed placing the PM.

picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2039
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4865 on: July 19, 2015, 02:53:13 PM »
Ok,lets do it ass about.
We want to achieve say a 10 Lb pull force on that spring. With the ferrite block in place,we may need say 12v @ 2 amp's applied to our electromagnet to achieve such a force. We then replace that ferrite block with a PM of the same size,and we now find that we need only apply say 6V @ 1 amp to achieve the same pull force on that spring. So the work done against the spring is the same,but we need only apply half the energy to that electromagnet to achieve the same work done.

Using similar methods, what conclusions would be drawn regarding the ferrite block if experiment 1 used a block of wood and experiment 2 used a block of ferrite?

If a block of wood is too nonsensical, consider any material to which the EM is less attracted than ferrite.

Curiously, just food for thought (as I have my first coffee)...

PW

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4866 on: July 19, 2015, 02:53:13 PM »
Neither this experiment nor the one TinMan describes demonstrate that PMs can do work.  Does a mirror do work when it reflects a light beam, as compared to a piece of glass painted flat black?  Does a ball bounce higher when dropped (from the same height) on concrete, or when dropped on soft sand?  You are merely  _redirecting_ some of the energy that you put into the electromagnet in the first place.

Well, regarding my test I referred to I think the increased height for the upper permanent magnet was possible due to the extra magnetic flux present in the full setup (I mean the flux from the permanent magnet placed under the coil in test 2).
However, I did not consider my input to the setup when I placed the permanent magnet under the coil, this is true and should be counted in the total input energy. The question is how my personal input with the placement of the magnet under the coil compares to the increased potential energy of the upper permanent magnet. As per conventional physics laws the increased potential energy received for the upper magnet barely covers my energy input while the DC input to the coil is maintained the same...

Gyula

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4867 on: July 19, 2015, 02:55:05 PM »


  I want to try and find out if anybody is good at physics.
What I want to know is with the Pluto mission would the clock
on board have"lost" time compared to here on earth.
If the thing went at 16.316 km/sec and there were 10 years
worth of seconds what would happen?
         John.
Yes, let's say that there was a Cs clock on the spacecraft it would be running slightly behind a twin Cs clock here on earth.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4868 on: July 19, 2015, 02:55:56 PM »
Ok,lets do it ass about.
We want to achieve say a 10 Lb pull force on that spring. With the ferrite block in place,we may need say 12v @ 2 amp's applied to our electromagnet to achieve such a force. We then replace that ferrite block with a PM of the same size,and we now find that we need only apply say 6V @ 1 amp to achieve the same pull force on that spring. So the work done against the spring is the same,but we need only apply half the energy to that electromagnet to achieve the same work done.
You are counting power as energy.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4869 on: July 19, 2015, 02:58:04 PM »
There is law about conservation of energy.There is no law about conservation of work.

So true.
There is also no law stating the amount of work that can be done via different means simultaneously with a given energy input. It should say-every action can have equal and opposite reactions

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4870 on: July 19, 2015, 02:59:33 PM »
So true.
There is also no law stating the amount of work that can be done via different means simultaneously with a given energy input. It should say-every action can have equal and opposite reactions
N3 is about force.

Jimboot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4871 on: July 19, 2015, 03:00:33 PM »
Well, it depends. I still think that it is better for the beginning scoposcopist to learn technique using an analog scope. Digital and analog scopes will each have their little "foibles" that should be understood before attempting to interpret measurements taken with them. While it is true that DSOs make obtaining some measurements much easier than analog scopes do, you still have to watch out for those "gotchas". For example, take a look at this video, and study the scopeshot below.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc-Op1_Ka8g

What to purchase, if you have no experience with scopes at all? For 200 dollars you can get a used analog scope that originally cost thousands of dollars, and you can have a lot of fun learning how to use it well. Or you can spend 400 dollars and get a pretty powerful entry-level DSO that is so complicated that you may never actually use all its features... and you may never know whether it is lying to you or not.


Thanks TK. I don't even use all the features on my Toyota. I think I'll still go with the rigol. At least then I'll have plenty of folk who'll be able to tell me how I'm reading it wrong. :)

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4872 on: July 19, 2015, 03:01:53 PM »
You are counting power as energy.
What is electrical energy?
mechanical energy(the HP)is now converted into electrical energy(KW's)
My cars engine is now calculated in KW's,not HP<--which is a mechanical energy amount.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4873 on: July 19, 2015, 03:03:59 PM »

Thanks TK. I don't even use all the features on my Toyota. I think I'll still go with the rigol. At least then I'll have plenty of folk who'll be able to tell me how I'm reading it wrong. :)
I think that is a good choice.  The deep memory that the 1054 offers with four channels is a very useful thing.  Analog scopes suck at looking at one time or intermittent events.  Just be aware that if you get an extraordinary appearing result that you just can't take that at face value.  But that's true no matter how fancy the kit.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4874 on: July 19, 2015, 03:05:19 PM »
N3 is about force.
Force is not energy.
I can place a wooden beam against a brick wall,and that beam will apply a force on that brick wall,but there is no energy being dissipated .