Author Topic: Fluxite (Read 10496 times)

Fluxite · « **on:** December 21, 2015, 04:22:21 AM »

Hey all,

2 videos regarding updates on our progress:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRsR24qnyD0
Magnet primer for Amateur Scientists and Inventors working on Generators.

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHF_AoflQVY
Theory behind what we are working on.

Moderator, I could not find a video section on the site so hope its ok to post here

Fluxite

TinselKoala · « **Reply #1 on:** December 22, 2015, 01:55:29 PM »

Quote from: Fluxite on December 21, 2015, 04:22:21 AM

Hey all,

2 videos regarding updates on our progress:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRsR24qnyD0
Magnet primer for Amateur Scientists and Inventors working on Generators.

Please explain why you do not show the "prototype" spinning on its own at the end of the video.

(I know why, and so do you.)

Quote

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHF_AoflQVY
Theory behind what we are working on.

"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." - Richard P. Feynman

Quote

Moderator, I could not find a video section on the site so hope its ok to post here

Fluxite

I'm not a moderator, but I can't help but notice that both your videos on YT have "Comments Disabled". What is the reason for that, I wonder?

conradelektro · « **Reply #2 on:** December 22, 2015, 03:12:30 PM »

The "progress" is the 3D-printer, which allows to build nicely looking contraptions in a fast and comparatively easy way. (I like 3D-printers and eventually I will buy one. But this is not related to a permanent magnet motor.)

The "theory" does not give "consistent" results. And also a 3D-printer will not print a useful permanent magnet motor.

What you get for free at www.fluxite.com is not useful, but might be entertaining and can certainly be printed with a 3D-Printer.

Still, I appreciate that the "inventor" comes forward. I hope he sticks to the truth and shows everything when claiming something.

But as we have seen over and over again, the miracle will not be explained (because the explanation would make the miracle go away).

Greetings, Conrad

Fluxite · « **Reply #3 on:** December 22, 2015, 04:30:15 PM »

wow - you guys are harsh, like a bully.

In your comments, you failed to discuss the theory presented and seem to prefer nit picking, whereas I had hoped to have intellectual discussions on what we have presented to you.

As such, I consider myself to be much more an expert than any of you that commented previously, and will proceed to prove it.

==========
For those that understand or want to understand:

In the design of a permanent magnetic motor, the problem is and always has been the magnetic gate. Passing the gate is not a problem, the problem has been the loss of momentum after passing the gate.

The solution is to create a fixed in position low pressure (magnetic field dipole) using one method, then creating the movement (high pressure) using a second unrelated method.

The two methods are separated and require two different amounts of energy to maintain.

This is presented in the video.

No - we do not yet have a working motor, we do have a tested working theory for which I had hoped some of you would grasp and participate in the mechanical solution.

Warm regards,
Fluxite

TinselKoala · « **Reply #4 on:** December 22, 2015, 05:15:06 PM »

Quote from: Fluxite on December 22, 2015, 04:30:15 PM

wow - you guys are harsh, like a bully.

In your comments, you failed to discuss the theory presented and seem to prefer nit picking, whereas I had hoped to have intellectual discussions on what we have presented to you.

As such, I consider myself to be much more an expert than any of you that commented previously, and will proceed to prove it.

There is no need for you to provide any more proof that you consider yourself to be much more of an expert than anyone else here... that much is already obvious. However, how you consider yourself is not really relevant. The fact that you think you can make a permanent-magnet motor spin and create energy all on its own is evidence that your self-perception may not be... shall we say... entirely accurate.

Quote

==========
For those that understand or want to understand:

In the design of a permanent magnetic motor, the problem is and always has been the magnetic gate. Passing the gate is not a problem, the problem has been the loss of momentum after passing the gate.

The solution is to create a fixed in position low pressure (magnetic field dipole) using one method, then creating the movement (high pressure) using a second unrelated method.

The two methods are separated and require two different amounts of energy to maintain.

This is presented in the video.

Much of what you present in the video is correct and is common knowledge, and is news to no one here. (Leaving aside the questionable use of some terminology.) Where you break down is in your failure to demonstrate anything that is constructed according to your theory and actually spins on its own. Why did you not do this? After all, your prototype shown at the end of the first video embodies your theory, does it not? Yet you did not even bother to give it a spin with your hand, much less show it spinning on its own.

Quote

No - we do not yet have a working motor, we do have a tested working theory for which I had hoped some of you would grasp and participate in the mechanical solution.

Warm regards,
Fluxite

Please explain why, if you have "a tested working theory", you do not yet have a working motor. You state that you consider yourself "more of an expert" yet you are asking for people to participate in the mechanical solution? How do you know what level of expertise conradelectro has? Or that I have?

Are you having some difficulty constructing things with your 3-d printer? Can't get the right kind of magnets? Too much bearing friction? (I note for example that your bearings still have their shields/grease seals installed, which add unnecessary friction.) Or is it some more subtle reason.... like perhaps your "tested working theory" does not in fact work quite like you think?

And of course you did not explain why you have disallowed comments on your YouTube videos. Don't you realize that this is a common tactic used by people who don't really want discussion, but who are interested only in pushing one side of a polarized agenda? If you are confident in your theory and your demonstrations, you should _encourage_ all discussion and you should be able to meet criticism and skepticism with solid facts, checkable outside references, and demonstrations of your own. The fact that you don't allow comments on your YT videos tells me that you don't really want to engage with your critics or hear what skeptics may have to say... and more importantly, you don't want the viewers of your videos to see skeptical or critical comments.

Fluxite · « **Reply #5 on:** December 22, 2015, 05:37:06 PM »

Thank you for the input.

It does not yet rotate 361 degrees, have to make that clear.

The bearings are skateboard bearings and I am not concerned with a.005 loss due to friction.

Youtube has a far different crowd and I have posted here for intellectual comments.

Now we can discuss details.

preamble: I tend to use common terms as its easier for others to understand.

In general, and simplified, the device has one magnet that pushes (a pusher) against a disk that contains many magnets.

In combination with a second magnet and metal plate (deflector), which is used to deflect / move the magnetic fields of the disk magnets in close proximity.

1) The deflector maintains its state with no energy used.
2) The pusher maintains its state with no energy used.
3) To get movement translated to the disk, requires energy.

The energy to move the disk comes from the magnetic field of the pusher pressing against the disks magnet V shaped field.

The device does not yet spin however results are as expected and according to tests.

Fluxite

conradelektro · « **Reply #6 on:** December 22, 2015, 10:17:36 PM »

Quote from: Fluxite on December 22, 2015, 05:37:06 PM

The device does not yet spin however results are as expected and according to tests.

I totally agree that the device does not spin.

How can there be "results as expected and according to tests" if the device does not spin?

Your theory predicts that the device will spin (will overcome cogging), but it does not, therefore the expectations of your theory are not present in reality.

What is missing in your device? What addition to the device would make it spin? Do you think you know how to alter the device in order to make its pin?

Greetings, Conrad

Fluxite · « **Reply #7 on:** December 22, 2015, 10:51:35 PM »

thanks for the note Conrad,

Its just being developed and spacing / mag strengths still need to be tuned.

The device is doing what its suppose to at this stage.

Perhaps an analogy will assist the understanding of what we have here:

===========
A 10 kg ball is lifted to the top of a slide. When it rolls down it uses up its stored energy.

However it only takes 1/2 the amount of that released energy to lift it back up to the top again.

===========

The Fluxite device presented uses less energy to 'bend' the fields than it takes to move the disk.

Not sure if that helps with this explanation but unless one were to take the time to grasp the details, its the best I can do.

You mentioned cogging - good because the movement is generated from the cogging, or at least one side of it. This is what pushes the disk. The trick was to minimize the resistance from the other side of the cogging. Hope that doesn't confuse the discussion.

Fluxite

seychelles · « **Reply #8 on:** December 23, 2015, 04:02:41 AM »

FLUXITE great work there i know that together we will find an answer..This is my bucks worth..

Fluxite · « **Reply #9 on:** December 23, 2015, 06:45:52 AM »

mmm, interesting, got it,

Each magnet acts individually, meaning that each would have its own gate to overcome.

With this design, what would be needed is a method of overcoming each magnet's gate, so that more push is preserved than what is used to get each magnet to the next gate.

Or, another way to look at your image is that it does have a good layout but is missing the part that eliminates the energy needed overcome the approach.

I would have to study and incorporate the 'flux deflector' (sounds stupid but I don't know what else to call it) to understand the torque available with this design.

A magnets maximum torque can be measured in pounds and is the same energy required to pull two magnets apart at the distance they are apart in the device.

Sorry I am an inventor, not a wordsmith so I do hope this makes sense.

Fluxite

seychelles · « **Reply #10 on:** December 23, 2015, 08:51:32 AM »

It's all good FLUXITE, it is all good fun, if we knew exactly what to say and do
we would have WINGS ON OUR BACKS LIKE THE ANGELS OF GOD..

conradelektro · « **Reply #11 on:** December 23, 2015, 09:38:22 AM »

Quote from: Fluxite on December 22, 2015, 10:51:35 PM

Its just being developed and spacing / mag strengths still need to be tuned.

Perhaps an analogy will assist the understanding of what we have here ....

unless one were to take the time to grasp the details, its the best I can do.

The trick was to minimize the resistance from the other side of the cogging.

Development, tuning, analogy, details, tricks, theory, words, intermediate stages, all very good and of course, you may do and build whatever you like. It is great fun to build something with a 3D-printer and I understand your enthusiasm and your optimism.

Please accept: the only proof would be a self-turning wheel or a self oscillating pendulum or linear back and forth sliding thing.

What I would do: first there has to be the self turning or self oscillating thing and then come the theories, analogies and big words.

Since the middle ages the following happened: theories, words, claims, not just finished contraptions and never a self turning or self oscillating thing.

I do not want to discourage or ridicule you, I only beg for the right order of presentation (first the self turning, then the claim).

I also want to present an analogy:

If I asked you whether you have a kilo of gold, the only acceptable proof would be that you present the kilo of gold and let me examine it, e.g. by checking weight per volume by putting it in water in a measuring glass and then weighing the gold on good scales. No amount of theory and words can replace this necessary proof (presenting the gold and letting me examine it).

What you seem to do is trying to avoid the presentation of the gold by offering a theory, a not finished contraption and an analogy.

I understand that you believe to have a way to make a wheel turn by it self (by help of permanent magnets). It is o.k. that you believe or hope to have that. But what I want to stress is the fact that you have no proof. And for all people (besides yourself), the only thing that would make your believe or hope interesting and acceptable is proof (which can only be a self turning wheel checked by a reliable person in a reliable way).

In other words, your claim is premature. And because so many people tried what you try for ages without success, it is kind of strange, that you want us to believe you without proof. Common sense and hundreds of years of counter proof stand against you. I hope you see now, why you have to present a terribly good proof before anybody will take you seriously.

Greetings, Conrad

seychelles · « **Reply #12 on:** December 23, 2015, 11:39:30 AM »

CONRAD I TAKE HIM SERIOUSLY BECAUSE HE IS AT LEAST TRYING WHAT YOU CALL THE IMPOSSIBLE ..
THE WRIGHT BROTHERS WAS RIDICULED ONCE UPON A TIME AND NOW WE FLY A PLANE.. SO PLEASE
THIS IS XMAS THE CELEBRATION OF INNOCENCE AND THE DAY OF A NEW COVENANT BETWEEN US AND
GOD PEACE BE WITH ALL..

Cherryman · « **Reply #13 on:** December 23, 2015, 11:45:54 AM »

Intresting, This reminds me a little of what Thomas Bearden is talking about.

Keep up the good work!

Fluxite · « **Reply #14 on:** December 23, 2015, 05:28:07 PM »

#conradelektro ~ Lots of words wasted with no substance on the facts as presented.

Free Energy is happening when the Earth races around the Sun for billions of years....

Having me filed for over 24 patents worldwide, on other inventions, I can tell you all that inventing is not some mysterious wake up in the middle of the night inspiration. This one is freeware.

It takes hard work and investigating every possibility for a solution.

Like to a maze, an inventor starts at one end and comes out at the other.

What I have found is that there is only one solution found (and only one), in regards to a pure magnet driven engine. The solution can be incorporated into many other configurations.

The solution required is to allow the device to pass the gate without loss of momentum.

Regarding this, think of the solution as wind whereby you need to allow the air to move to the low pressure without the pressure equalizing.

We have presented a method that maintains this low pressure in the magnetic flux. Tests prove it in the videos.

To this board, I am not trying to bullshit you, I have presented a solution which I hope you will be able to contribute.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Fluxite (Read 10496 times)

Fluxite

Fluxite

TinselKoala

Re: Fluxite

conradelektro

Re: Fluxite

Fluxite

Re: Fluxite

TinselKoala

Re: Fluxite

Fluxite

Re: Fluxite

conradelektro

Re: Fluxite

Fluxite

Re: Fluxite

seychelles

Re: Fluxite

Fluxite

Re: Fluxite

seychelles

Re: Fluxite

conradelektro

Re: Fluxite

seychelles

Re: Fluxite

Cherryman

Re: Fluxite

Fluxite

Re: Fluxite