Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: guest1289 on August 12, 2015, 10:55:23 PM

Title: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 12, 2015, 10:55:23 PM
A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING',  INVENTED TODAY

The  image in the  URL  below,  is not the NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING',  INVENTED TODAY ,  but it is the basis of it.

http://overunity.com/6048/using-magnets-instead-of-bearings/dlattach/attach/27840/image// 

A  new type of  magnetic-bearing  could be based on the above principle in the image at the  above  URL ,   and instead   of  'flattish-round magnets',   magnetic-tubes/pipes   could be used,  for example,  4 pipes arranged in a circle,  and the  'bearing' or  moving-part  spins in the middle of the circle    )

(   Now I don't know what to do,   I am totally tired out from the process and problems of filing a   'provisional-patent-application'  for  'MY OTHER INVENTION'  related to this (  I cannot sneakily add this NEW-INVENTION  as modification to my   'provisional-patent-application'  for  'MY OTHER INVENTION',   because modifications are not allowed on  'provisional-patent-applications'  .   
     The patent system,  is keeping  everyone down (  because they try to turn the government  patent-departments  into profit making businesses,   and the result is that the  'average-individual'  loses reasonable access to patenting their  intellectual-property    )
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: MarkE on August 12, 2015, 11:05:49 PM
A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING',  INVENTED TODAY

The  image in the  URL  below,  is not the NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING',  INVENTED TODAY ,  but it is the basis of it.

http://overunity.com/6048/using-magnets-instead-of-bearings/dlattach/attach/27840/image// 

A  new type of  magnetic-bearing  could be based on the above principle in the image at the  above  URL ,   and instead   of  'flattish-round magnets',   magnetic-tubes/pipes   could be used,  for example,  4 pipes arranged in a circle,  and the  'bearing' or  moving-part  spins in the middle of the circle    )

(   Now I don't know what to do,   I am totally tired out from the process and problems of filing a   'provisional-patent-application'  for  'MY OTHER INVENTION'  related to this (  I cannot sneakily add this NEW-INVENTION  as modification to my   'provisional-patent-application'  for  'MY OTHER INVENTION',   because modifications are not allowed on  'provisional-patent-applications'  .   
     The patent system,  is keeping  everyone down (  because they try to turn the government  patent-departments  into profit making businesses,   and the result is that the  'average-individual'  loses reasonable access to patenting their  intellectual-property    )
First: Please stop spamming by opening multiple threads on the same subject.

You also cannot obtain a defensible patent on prior art.  If you are trying to attract investors or some such thing then you will need to explain to them what problem it is that you solved, and why you were able to solve it and others before you did not.
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 12, 2015, 11:49:09 PM
I only started a new   thread   because to me it does in fact appear  'obvious'  that  today I have invented a   'NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING',  which is distinct from  'MY-OTHER-MAGNETIC-BEARING-INVENTION',  in that this  'NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING'  has the full versatility to be used in all applications that other  'magnetic-bearings'  are normally used in  (  due to a  sufficiently  different design from  'MY-OTHER-MAGNETIC-BEARING-INVENTION'  )  .

MY OTHER REASON FOR CREATING  A NEW  THREAD,   IS BECAUSE IT IS THE BEST WAY OF MAKING THE OTHER  INVENTORS  ON THIS SITE  IMMEDIATELY  AWARE OF  THIS   'NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING'.
IT,  COULD FOR EXAMPLE,  PROVIDE A SOLUTION TO PROBLEMS THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SOLVE.

(   It fell into a  grey  area,  of whether or not to create a new thread  )

(  I have observed  the consequences for this site resulting from the  unnecessary  creation of new threads,   and threads created to attract investors for  fraudulent  inventions( where not all the details of how the invention works are disclosed ),    and new threads created to discuss subjects which are  irrelevant  to this site ( as entertaining as they are  ) .

The only  thread  I have ever created  unnecessarily,    was the one  regarding  a  'non-electric-permanent-magnet-powered-faraday-motor'  ,    because   'I DID NOT KNOW'  that that subject was already being discussed in another thread called   'Permanent magnet motor',   I had not seen that thread before,   and I thought that  specific designs  of  'magnet-motors'  had their own thread.

If anyone wants to contact me to   'write and draw and file'  my 'patent-application'  for  todays invention,  AND  address the  'financial-costs' associated with that process ,    CONTACT ME at   john.backerwww@gmail.com

Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 13, 2015, 02:11:11 AM
.

Below is  an image of  this  NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING',  I INVENTED TODAY

(  It's  obviously  'incredibly' simple  )

In the  image  below,  at  the  point  labelled at the bottom of the image as   'POINT X' ,   there would be a  'magnetic-cradle'  such as the  one in  my other  invention  http://overunity.com/15966/my-levitating-object-invention/msg459006/#msg459006  ,    to keep the   moving-part   of the  magnetic-bearing   in place in the opposite  90-degree angle,   to make it a  100%  magnetic-bearing,  unlike others.


(  This can function in all the  applications  where all other  magnetic-bearings  can function in,  which makes it different to my  'OTHER MAGNETIC-BEARING-INVENTION'     http://overunity.com/15966/my-levitating-object-invention/msg459006/#msg459006  ,   but that invention has it's own  significant  advantages   )

If anyone wants to contact me to   'write and draw and file'  my 'patent-application'  for  todays invention,  AND  address the  'financial-costs' associated with that process ,    CONTACT ME at   john.backerwww@gmail.com
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: TinselKoala on August 13, 2015, 02:17:49 AM
Your magnetic bearing ideas won't work, neither this one nor the other one. You have not found a way around Earnshaw's Theorem at all. Your  system is unstable as others have already pointed out to you. I suggest that you "curb your enthusiasm" until you have done some experimentation for yourself and have constructed some prototypes or testbeds. You may learn a lot by doing so.

There are several ways that magnetic levitation/non-contact bearings can work.
One is stabilization through rotation (like the Levitron toy).
Another is active stabilization using electromagnets and feedback loops.
A third way is to use superconductivity, flux pinning (Meissner effect).

Levitron-type systems are dependent upon very careful adjustment and spinning to stay in the "sweet spot" for levitation to occur. The "Mendocino Motor" system needs one small contact point to stabilize the system so it will work. Steorn used this type of magnetic bearing in their Orbo designs. Active (electromagnetic, feedback-stabilized) magnetic bearing systems are used in a number of commercial applications such as high-end turbomolecular vacuum pumps. Superconducting systems need active cooling which adds to complexity and cost.
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 13, 2015, 02:43:22 AM
The simple ones  function(  where they just rest on the  'two'  magnets etc ),  there are numerous  genuine youtube videos,  showing them working with no problems,    examine the image at the  URL  below  .

(  I WAS worried that  using more than  two  magnets,   would not function the same as the simple ones,   BUT NOW I HAVE REALIZED THAT IF THE  DIAMETER  OF THE  MOVING-PART ( IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BEARING )  IS LARGE ENOUGH,   THAT IT WILL FUNCTION   )

http://overunity.com/6048/using-magnets-instead-of-bearings/dlattach/attach/27840/image//

(  your browser may only download the image above,  and then you may have to click on the  download  to  view it  )

NOW,  GO TO MY INVENTION   http://overunity.com/15966/my-levitating-object-invention/msg459006/#new  ,   THEN GO TO THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD,  AND GO TO THE POST ON   'August 11, 2015, 06:33:51 AM'  ,  AND  EXAMINE  THE IMAGE  LABELLED   3_V magneticTrack.jpg   ,     AND TELL ME      THAT IF THE    'LEVITATING-OBJECT'  WAS  A  FULL-RING  LEVITATING  ABOVE THE  TWO-RINGS  IN THAT IMAGE,      THAT THAT WOULD NOT WORK,   IF IT WAS JUST SET UP ON A STEADY TABLE     ?
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: MarkE on August 13, 2015, 02:59:47 AM
Please stop with the all caps.

If you think you are going to get anywhere then at least for yourself come up with what it is you think you have that is unique, why you think it would work, and why you think no one thought of it before.  If you thnk you have good answers to all three questions then you can start working on analyzing / modeling it, and/or building a prototype.
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: TinselKoala on August 13, 2015, 03:41:23 AM
The simple ones  function(  where they just rest on the  'two'  magnets etc ),  there are numerous  genuine youtube videos,  showing them working with no problems,    examine the image at the  URL  below  .

(  I WAS worried that  using more than  two  magnets,   would not function the same as the simple ones,   BUT NOW I HAVE REALIZED THAT IF THE  DIAMETER  OF THE  MOVING-PART ( IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BEARING )  IS LARGE ENOUGH,   THAT IT WILL FUNCTION   )

http://overunity.com/6048/using-magnets-instead-of-bearings/dlattach/attach/27840/image// (http://overunity.com/6048/using-magnets-instead-of-bearings/dlattach/attach/27840/image//)

(  your browser may only download the image above,  and then you may have to click on the  download  to  view it  )


THIS IS THE "MENDOCINO MOTOR" SUSPENSION SYSTEM. IT REQUIRES ONE POINT CONTACT FOR STABILITY. WITHOUT THIS CONTACT THE ROTOR WILL SIMPLY CRASH INTO THE SUSPENDING MAGNETS. THIS IS IN FACT A DEMONSTRATION OF THE TRUTH OF EARNSHAW'S THEOREM.
HERE IS A VIDEO OF MY ELECTROSTATIC MOTOR USING THAT SUSPENSION SYSTEM:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfw-TeJ9r4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfw-TeJ9r4)

Quote

NOW,  GO TO MY INVENTION   http://overunity.com/15966/my-levitating-object-invention/msg459006/#new (http://overunity.com/15966/my-levitating-object-invention/msg459006/#new)  ,   THEN GO TO THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD,  AND GO TO THE POST ON   'August 11, 2015, 06:33:51 AM'  ,  AND  EXAMINE  THE IMAGE  LABELLED   3_V magneticTrack.jpg   ,     AND TELL ME      THAT IF THE    'LEVITATING-OBJECT'  WAS  A  FULL-RING  LEVITATING  ABOVE THE  TWO-RINGS  IN THAT IMAGE,      THAT THAT WOULD NOT WORK,   IF IT WAS JUST SET UP ON A STEADY TABLE     ?


THAT IS RIGHT, IT WILL NOT WORK. BUILD IT YOURSELF AND FIND OUT WHY NOT. DON'T SMASH YOUR FINGERS!
(It might work if you can spin-stabilize the "levitated" magnet properly. Then you will have invented the Levitron.)

YOU SAY YOU "CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING"... I WONDER WHY NOT? WHAT IS PREVENTING YOU FROM ORDERING SOME MAGNETS FROM A SUPPLIER AND PUTTING THEM TOGETHER IN WHATEVER WAY YOU LIKE?

AND ALL_CAPS IS CONSIDERED "SHOUTING" AND IS NOT NECESSARY TO GET YOUR POINTS ACROSS. SEE WHAT I MEAN??
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 13, 2015, 04:58:29 AM

Thanks for identifying it,   by telling me the name of it ( MENDOCINO MOTOR" SUSPENSION SYSTEM ),  that is a big help for what I'm doing .    (   I did not know it will crash without   'One point of physical contact for stability' ,   amazing   )

(  I may have slightly misunderstood  regarding that  it will crash without   'One point of physical contact for stability'  ,    Since you only said  'One point of contact for stability'  ,   you did not say  'physical contact',   but I'm going to examine it   )

Soon,   I will examine it properly( the MENDOCINO MOTOR" SUSPENSION SYSTEM ),    just to assure myself  that the    'One point of physical contact for stability'   required by the   'Mendocino Motor Suspension System'  ,    cannot infact be replaced by a  contactless  magnetic-bearing,   based on the same principle as this  'Suspension System'  ,    For Example,   by putting a    magnetic-ball  on the  very end of the  axle,   and  then using the same principle as this  'Suspension System' to  repel  the  magnetic-ball (  but,  by using  2  pipe/tube-shaped-magnets   instead of  flat-round-circular-magnets,   to repel the  magnetic-ball   )

The  ring  levitating  above the  2 rings( in my levitating object invention  ),   could just be made of plastic,   and at every  90-degrees around the circle,   it could have  something like  a   magnetic-ball  to  levitate it  above the  2  rings (  4 balls in total ). 
     But,   instead of a   full-ring   floating  above the   '2-rings',   it could just be something like  a  single    'magnetic-ball( which has a small stick containing a small weight extending from its underside to keep the magnetic ball pointing in one direction to maintain repulsion  )   levitating above    the   '2-rings'. 
(   Although I believe everything you have told me,  I'm not totally giving up  )

(  I can't go into the details why I can't build anything  )

(  I'm already reducing my use of  text all written in capital letters  )

(  Hopefully,  you are right,  and I will not have to waste anymore time on my designs that you have seen,   
 
_________

You could,  if you wanted to,  try and  debunk my   'magnet-motor' ,  in the
the thread I created for it     http://overunity.com/15860/can-anyone-identify-this-mystery-magnet-motor-or-provide-any-information/msg454866/#msg454866   ,   and in particular,   the  'drum-version'   of it on the first page of that thread  posted on   'July 10, 2015, 12:06:20 AM'   ,  in image    'DRUM VERSION.JPG'  ,     

____________

But regardless,   your information has been very useful,  theres nothing worse that wasting time on things that other people already know cannot work
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: TinselKoala on August 13, 2015, 06:25:17 AM
Thanks for identifying it,   by telling me the name of it ( MENDOCINO MOTOR" SUSPENSION SYSTEM ),  that is a big help for what I'm doing .    (   I did not know it will crash without   'One point of physical contact for stability' ,   amazing   )

(  I may have slightly misunderstood  regarding that  it will crash without   'One point of physical contact for stability'  ,    Since you only said  'One point of contact for stability'  ,   you did not say  'physical contact',   but I'm going to examine it   )
Yes, it has to be a rigid, physical contact.

Quote

Soon,   I will examine it properly( the MENDOCINO MOTOR" SUSPENSION SYSTEM ),    just to assure myself  that the    'One point of physical contact for stability'   required by the   'Mendocino Motor Suspension System'  ,    cannot infact be replaced by a  contactless  magnetic-bearing,   based on the same principle as this  'Suspension System'  ,    For Example,   by putting a    magnetic-ball  on the  very end of the  axle,   and  then using the same principle as this  'Suspension System' to  repel  the  magnetic-ball (  but,  by using  2  pipe/tube-shaped-magnets   instead of  flat-round-circular-magnets,   to repel the  magnetic-ball   )
No, unfortunately that won't work. You'll notice that the "MM" suspension system has a sharp point, bearing onto a piece of glass, for very low friction. The levitation magnets need to be adjusted so that the rotor axle's point bears gently on the glass. If this point-contact has any flexibility, the rotor will crash, since it is being simultaneously attracted and repelled by the lower supporting magnets on the frame, and must be precisely fixed in position axially with respect to the magnets on the frame. People have tried using magnets on one or the other or even both ends of the axle to attain this fixed position, but it has never worked because of the "springiness" of the magnetic attraction or repulsion. The rigid point-contact is the only way that has been discovered so far to make the suspension stable.
Steorn's variant of this system used a vertical axle and very strong ring magnets, concentrically positioned on frame and axle, with the "point contact" being a hardened ball which bore against the hardened face of a micrometer adjusting screw. By adjusting the mike, the proper axial position could be set and maintained at a low-friction but axially stable position.

All of that being said, these systems are fun to experiment with and I am encouraging you to do some experimentation of your own, if and when you are able. Perhaps you can find a new arrangement that hasn't yet been tried. But as I said earlier, as long as you don't have some kind of prototype, and are covering ground that has already been well explored, you might think about holding off on making big claims, and especially, I'd advise that you don't spend any money on patent lawyers...yet! Wait till you have a proof-of-concept prototype constructed that works as you think it should.
Quote
The  ring  levitating  above the  2 rings( in my levitating object invention  ),   could just be made of plastic,   and at every  90-degrees around the circle,   it could have  something like  a   magnetic-ball  to  levitate it  above the  2  rings (  4 balls in total ). 
     But,   instead of a   full-ring   floating  above the   '2-rings',   it could just be something like  a  single    'magnetic-ball( which has a small stick containing a small weight extending from its underside to keep the magnetic ball pointing in one direction to maintain repulsion  )   levitating above    the   '2-rings'. 
(   Although I believe everything you have told me,  I'm not totally giving up  )

(  I can't go into the details why I can't build anything  )

(  I'm already reducing my use of  text all written in capital letters  )

(  Hopefully,  you are right,  and I will not have to waste anymore time on my designs that you have seen,   
 
_________
Thank you for not using all-caps routinely.
I think, as I said earlier, that rotational (spinning) stabilization might work with your ring magnet arrangement, but again, this would then be a variation on the Levitron, and those things are pretty hard to adjust properly. When they are, they are pretty amazing for sure, but they can't really take any appreciable load like a real _electromagnetic, feedback-controlled_ levitating bearing system can.
It's my strong belief that your system as described would only produce "crashes" as the object you are trying to levitate slips out of its required position. The situation is kind of like trying to balance a marble on top of a bowling ball. There "may" be one exact point where you could balance the thing, but the very least slightest perturbation or vibration or off-center situation will make it "diverge" and crash. With magnets it's even harder -- in fact, as Earnshaw proved, impossible -- because of that "springiness" thing.

Quote
You could,  if you wanted to,  try and  debunk my   'magnet-motor' ,  in the
the thread I created for it     http://overunity.com/15860/can-anyone-identify-this-mystery-magnet-motor-or-provide-any-information/msg454866/#msg454866 (http://overunity.com/15860/can-anyone-identify-this-mystery-magnet-motor-or-provide-any-information/msg454866/#msg454866)   ,   and in particular,   the  'drum-version'   of it on the first page of that thread  posted on   'July 10, 2015, 12:06:20 AM'   ,  in image    'DRUM VERSION.JPG'  ,     

____________

But regardless,   your information has been very useful,  theres nothing worse that wasting time on things that other people already know cannot work

Yes, I saw that earlier. The problem is that the strength of attraction of a magnet falls off rapidly. So there's an equilibrium position of the rotor magnets that will not cause any rotation. You could probably rotate the rotor by hand with very little "cogging" but there's no reason that it should rotate on its own. Furthermore, the system will actually act as a brake, due to eddy currents that are generated in the stator as the fields of the rotor magnets are dragged through the stator material.

But build it and see for yourself! Perhaps some pulse-motor builder can take an already-built rotor and wrap a length of iron barstock around it for a stator. It should be very easy to see if there's any tendency to rotate, simply by doing rundown tests in both directions. If you can't build anything at all, for some reason, maybe you could hire someone to do it for you, or you could ask some specific individuals to make and test it.

My problem is sort of the opposite of yours. I _could_ build many things, and have done so. But much of my machine tooling is out of reach, and I can't spend even a few pennies on projects like yours. But it wouldn't be very hard to do, especially for someone with a lathe and milling machine and other basic machine shop tools.

And just for fun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPqEEZa2Gis
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 14, 2015, 06:35:00 AM
The following is just for your information .   Your answers have cleared alot of confusion I have had.

(  But since I will not be building anything,  at any stage at all,  your typing is wasted on too many of the  lethargy-heads  in this site with their heads stuck in  conceptual dead-ends  etc,  by definition,  I may be one as well  )


Quote
So there's an equilibrium position of the rotor magnets that will not cause any rotation.
      The  stator  could have a  'very-fine  permanent-adjustment  extension piece' ,  to make it get as close as possible to the next  magnet on the  rotor  incoming to the very end of the  stator. 
(  Although,  I have an alternative idea,  which is something like a commutator( cog-wheel ) which is part of the  stator  and designed to break that equilibrium,  even though it's movement would mirror that of the rotor  )


Quote
Furthermore, the system will actually act as a brake, due to eddy currents that are generated in the stator as the fields of the rotor magnets are dragged through the stator material.
  The stator could be the magnet ( and changing it to a wedge shape could improve it's performance  ),  and the magnets on the rotor could be   replaced  with pieces of metal.


Quote
People have tried using magnets on one or the other or even both ends of the axle to attain this fixed position, but it has never worked because of the "springiness" of the magnetic attraction or repulsion. The rigid point-contact is the only way that has been discovered so far to make the suspension stable.
   I was going to attach the diagrams I've made for a  'provisional patent application'  for this  magnetic-bearing,  but I had better wait until I have actually sent it.
     In my  image  of this,  I have put  4  cylinder magnets around the   central-spinning-magnet  of  the  magnetic-bearing ,    to me,     'That Would Stabilize'    the   central-spinning-magnet   sufficiently  to then try putting different types of   smaller-magnetic-bearings   on the ends of the  axle  to prevent  the   central-spinning-magnet   from slipping out  of the  magnetic bearing  .
      (   One design for the   smaller-magnetic-bearings   on the ends of the  axle,    is a  magnetic-dome  or  magnetic-ball  on the end of the  axle,   and that   magnetic-ball  is repelled  by  either,  '3 or 4'  even   smaller  magnetic-balls or  magnetic-domes,   or,   by 2  or  4  cylinder-magnets  facing  perpendicular  to it   )

Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: TinselKoala on August 14, 2015, 07:02:57 AM
Any time you have relative motion between a magnet and a conductive metal piece you will have eddy currents generated in the metal, and this will act as a brake. It doesn't really matter which is "rotor" and which is "stator". You can get around some of this eddy current brake phenomenon by using nonconductive magnetic materials like certain ferrites, or by laminating with thin, insulated laminations in the proper orientation.

It's too bad you are prevented from building anything. I don't know of any basic full-motion magnetic field simulators that you could use to "virtually" test your ideas, maybe someone else does. I understand your idea as described, but I'm still afraid it won't work, for the reasons I've already stated.

Just so you know that I'm not totally full of "hot air" ... here are some things that I was experimenting with some years ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyPYBJfRVQ4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3JHdIzPmfk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3JHdIzPmfk)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZhljtwJHKw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZhljtwJHKw)
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 28, 2015, 03:42:22 AM
THE   'ROTATING-MAGNET'  IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS   'MAGNETIC-BEARING'  WOULD NOT JUMP OUT OF THIS   'MAGNETIC-BEARING'  ALONG THE  AXIS  OF  IT'S  AXLE  .
The  'rotating-magnet'  in the  middle  of this  magnetic-bearing( in the Diagram below ) is prevented from jumping out of the  'circle of magnets'  along the  axis  of  it's  axle,   by a  'repelling-magnet' right on the end if it's  central-axle.

______________

I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO THINK OF  ANY  REASON WHY THIS  'MAGNETIC-BEARING' MIGHT NOT WORK
The only way that I could think that this   'magnetic-bearing'   could fail,   would be if the   'rotating-magnet'  in the  middle  of the bearing,  would  'lean'( diagonally, or otherwise)   to one side within the circle of magnets. 
      The reason that might happen is because physical objects are not 100% symmetrical ( and their field would not be 100% symmetrical ).

THE SOLUTION TO THE ABOVE HYPOTHETICAL PROBLEM
     SO,  I think that if more than one of these   Magnetic-Bearings  was placed  along  the  'Same-Axle' ,  then any  'imperfections'  in the  'physical objects'( the magnets and their fields ) would be evened-out( balanced out ,  spread out ) among  'ALL'  of the  Magnetic-Bearings  placed  along  the  'Same-Axle'.   
      It's possible,  that the more  'Magnetic-Bearings  placed  along  the  'Same-Axle',  then the more effective that this solution would be.
        (   A solution to a  hypothetical problem  )
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: TinselKoala on August 28, 2015, 06:01:48 AM
No, it will not work. Yes, without a point of contact for stabilization it will "jump out" and crash. The reason for this is contained in Earnshaw's theorem and has to do with the 1/r and 1/r2 relationships between force and distance between magnets.

You might be interested in studying this patent application:
http://www.google.com/patents/US20110001379 (http://www.google.com/patents/US20110001379)

Note that they use ring magnets to completely surround the shaft magnets, performing the same function as your outside rods but going continuously around, as if you had a large number of rods. Also note that their system _requires_ axial restraint, which, in the embodiment used in the famous "plinth" Orbos demonstrated years ago, used a single hardened ball on the top end of the axle that bore against the hardened platen of a micrometer adjustment screw which allowed precise control (and restraint) along the axial direction.
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: nonlectricfltn on August 28, 2015, 08:18:34 AM
The  first  Diagram  Below  is the reason why  'The Rotating Magnet'  will not jump out of the   'Magnetic Bearing',  along the  axis  of the central  axle .

The second   Diagram  Below,  shows a version which would maximize stability if this is needed .

( This is me  guest1289,  this is my other account I have   )

(  Note :  This design preventing  'The Rotating Magnet'  from jumping out of the   'Magnetic Bearing'  is just a simple example,  an actual working example would possibly be more complicated,  but still be based on the same principles in the  diagrams  below  )
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: TinselKoala on August 29, 2015, 03:03:06 PM
Yes, your description is perfectly clear... and it WILL NOT WORK.  (It + might+ work if the axle is spinning fast enough, that is, spin-stabilized. But as soon as the spinning slows, it will crash.)

Unfortunately I can see that there is no possibility of convincing you of this. The only hope for you is to solve whatever problem is preventing you from performing your own experiments, so that you can do some bench work of your own, to see how magnets actually behave.

Do you really think that nobody has tried this before? Do you find some theoretical flaw in Earnshaw's Theorem? Don't you think that a company such as Steorn would have tried this and used it, if it could possibly work?

I have dozens of magnets here, I even have a full set of the superstrong, concentric ring magnets that Steorn used in their "zero-force" bearings that they used in the Plinth Orbos. And I've shown you already my working version of the Mendocino suspension... which requires that single point of _rigid contact_ which cannot be replaced with repelling magnets as in your idea. And many other people reading here also have plenty of magnets with which to build and test. But of course, when we fail to make something that works according to your idea, you can just say that we didn't do it exactly right somehow. The only way for you to really know is to DO IT YOURSELF, and build up a little real experience with magnets. 

Or, perhaps you could _hire_ someone, pay them what their time and expertise is worth and have them build something to your _exact_ dimensioned specifications.

Let me ask you frankly: Just what would it take for you to be convinced that this idea does not and cannot work? What kind of experimental or theoretical evidence would you accept? Clearly you do not accept Earnshaw's Theorem, or the input which I have given you. Is it possible that _no_ data from _anyone_ could convince you that your idea won't work?
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 29, 2015, 06:55:01 PM
.
I  wonder  if either the  'stator-magnets'  or  the  'rotating-magnet'  in  this  'magnetic-bearing',  were replaced with a  replica  made of  Bizmuth( or other diamagnetic material ),   what would be the result

   OR

     -  If the  'stator-magnets'  or  the  'rotating-magnet'  in  'Any Other'   'magnetic-bearing' ,   were replaced with a  replica  made of  Bizmuth( or other diamagnetic material )  ,   could it make a difference to them 

    No  real need to reply to this one,  I would assume it's already been tried etc
Title: Re: A NEW 'MAGNETIC-BEARING', INVENTED TODAY
Post by: guest1289 on August 30, 2015, 11:28:46 PM
.
In the diagram below,   is my new design for the   magnetic-bearing  that I created this thread for.

(  The  problem  with the diagram  is that I would have preferred to make the  spherical-magnets  slightly smaller,   and/or,  perhaps with more space between  each spherical-magnet.    )

I have replaced the  'cylindrical-permanent-magnets( stators )'  which keeps the   'central rotating-cylindrical-permanent-magnet'   in place in this  magnetic-bearing.  with   'spherical-magnets'  .

And,  I should state the reason why I think that the  previous-version  of this  magnetic-bearing( in the diagram below 'SIDE VIEW OF PREVIOUS VERSION.JPG'  )  could function successfully,  and that reason  is the relative   small-diameter   of the of the    'cylindrical-permanent-magnets( stators )'  when  compared  to the  large-diameter of the   'central rotating-cylindrical-permanent-magnet',   one reason why they have a   small-diameter  is so that they will not interfere with each others  magnetic-fields .  (   this is something I wan't to retain in my new version which uses   'spherical-magnets' ).

Don't bother  replying  saying this won't work,  I'm just posting it anyway