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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Magnets, motion and measurement  (Read 131905 times)

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 5031
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #360 on: October 15, 2019, 11:38:13 AM »
How to say, this drawing is really not a correct depiction of any magnetic field. It is just to show the concept. It doesn't work with the Coulumb model. Coulumb model is like both poles having a separate spherical, that is symmetric field. But a real magnetic field differs from the Coulumb model. And if the field lines are more parallel to the axis between the poles, then there may be enough asymmetry to enable overunity.

ayeaye ,is a compass needle  movement for you " overunity" ? Peregrinus. !

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #361 on: October 15, 2019, 12:44:25 PM »
ayeaye ,is a compass needle  movement for you " overunity" ?

I mean doing continuous work, this is what is mostly understood as overunity. Otherwise, dropping an object is likely overunity, the gravitational field does work to increase its speed, true? Then also a movement of a compass needle is overunity, the magnetic field does work, where the energy comes from? But in case of the compass needle the magnetic field doesn't do continuous work, so it's not overunity like it is mostly understood.

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 5031
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #362 on: October 15, 2019, 01:28:27 PM »
I mean doing continuous work, this is what is mostly understood as overunity. Otherwise, dropping an object is likely overunity, the gravitational field does work to increase its speed, true? Then also a movement of a compass needle is overunity, the magnetic field does work, where the energy comes from? But in case of the compass needle the magnetic field doesn't do continuous work, so it's not overunity like it is mostly understood.
Is electricity stream by pulsed or alternating current " continuous work". ?
Is the permanent magnet quantum-magnetoelectric work to see like DC,pulsative or alternating  ?
Is a permanent magnet in absolute " continuous work" ,slow motion observation ?

What is the influence " over Curie - temperature" and/ or"lower Kelvin". ? Temperature/ magnetic field strengh ,Temperature/ magnetic flow

Instead 165 Watt only 33 Watt for same output as bicycle drive by same torque and rpm :

only" peakconsume/ inertia" to " average consume" harmonizing ?

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #363 on: October 15, 2019, 01:37:46 PM »
Is electricity stream by pulsed or alternating current " continuous work". ?

No, there the field does not do continuous work, it works a limited time in one direction, this is also the reason why the current is alternating. These electromagnetic processes are very symmetric, it is a question how to break symmetry there.

PS Coulomb model, not Coulumb model, i fixed that before.

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 5031
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #364 on: October 15, 2019, 01:48:16 PM »
https://www.apfelkiste.ch/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/1000x/dbb748385a9a10925f0976de833f349b/n/e/neodym-magnet-kugel-puzzle-bunt_18_.jpg

From round ( each individual symmetry) to quadratic(  = several body related asymmetry)

Has the electrostatic field and the magnetic field the same direction. ?https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=Wheel&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=Donald+kelly&IN=Donald+kelly&CPC=&IC=
From "compass/Earth" to Kelly's " magnetic torque multiplier" wheel. !
And the referring "citing documents" !

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #365 on: October 16, 2019, 12:18:34 AM »
I think that citfta did a very important experiment, for the first time a permanent magnet device was measured. What the result will be, maybe nothing, just eroding a fixed ideas.

Floor, please understand, scales have some systematic error. Means measuring the same value several times may not increase precision. This systematic error is though mostly tied to the value, thus when measuring different values, the error can be considered to be random. Measuring the same force with several different scales, may  increase precision though, but the scales should then be preferably different types, so they don't have the same systematic error.

I said that in that case, the best may be to calculate the error of the greatest measured energy, and then consider that to be the error of the whole calculation. When this energy is significantly great. Like i think that citfta can safely consider the error of the energy of shifting the shield magnet, as the error of the final result of the calculation. That is likely the force of shifting multiplied by 100 mm in that case. This would be the error of the difference between the input and output energy. As this energy is the greatest and the most significant in his experiment. The other measured energies are all much smaller, and with a very high probability, their errors are not all to one direction.

Measuring that energy with fish scales though, would have a very great error. Such scales, as i asked from other people who have such scales, indeed have an error +/-1 ounce, thus like when it shows 5 ounces, it may also be 4 ounces or 6 ounces. Thus in that case of shifting the shield magnet, the measured force was 5 * 0.278 = 1.390 N, with the error +/-1 ounce, that is +/-0.278 N, that is the minimum and maximum values will be 1.112 N and 1.668 N. The energy of shifting will thus be 1.39 N * 100 mm = 139.0 mJ, with the minimum value 111.2 mJ, and the maximum value 166.8 mJ. The error of the difference between the input and output energies will then be 139.0 - 111.2 = +/-27.8 mJ, regardless of what the other measured energies will be.

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #366 on: October 16, 2019, 12:13:17 PM »
An end on view ,the field curves around and terminates at the middle of the thickness, not at the other pole.

Yes and this is a good thing, this makes it more to one direction.

How can i say it intuitively. The magnetic field is caused by electrons orbiting the nucleus of an atom. The force is between these orbiting electrons, like one may think that it is between two circles, though they are kind of clouds. But nevertheless, this makes the force to be more in one direction, than in the Coulomb model. That is, for that reason the magnetic field differs from the poles being just a point charges, in that case it were symmetric, a spherical field is symmetric. As it is not entirely symmetric in that way, one could assume that it is asymmetric. And in theory an asymmetric field should be able to do continuous work.

#### citfta

• Hero Member
• Posts: 949
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #367 on: October 18, 2019, 11:35:06 AM »
Ayeaye,

Would you PLEASE do some basic research before posting.  You have made many posts in this and the other threads about magnetic interactions that show you have not taken the time to do any real research.  I don't mean setting up a big lab with a lot of expensive equipment.  I mean that you should at least take the time to read all of a thread before posting.  It is just not polite to read a couple of posts and then jump in with comments.

I say this because of some comments you have made in your posts.  If you had read ALL of the posts in this and the other threads you would have seen the other videos I have posted.  If you had seen them you would have seen how I mounted the aluminum rails so they could move freely. And you would have seen how many bearings were on each rail.,

If you had actually read all of Norman't posts in his thread you would have seen references to what he is doing and would understand his picture he posted.

If you would take the time to actually get some magnets and work with them you would soon realize your idea of free energy from a magnet will probably not work.  My work and others seem to show that your sketch of magnetic forces does not seem to be supported by real world testing.

I mean no disrespect but hope you will realize that making comments about others without taking the time to really understand what they are doing is not a good way to build a relationship with them.

Respectfully,
Carroll

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #368 on: October 18, 2019, 02:09:28 PM »
If you had seen them you would have seen how I mounted the aluminum rails so they could move freely. And you would have seen how many bearings were on each rail.,

No, i only watched your video with measurements, i have not watched your other videos.

> If you would take the time to actually get some magnets and work with them you would soon realize your idea of free energy from a magnet will probably not work.  My work and others seem to show that your sketch of magnetic forces does not seem to be supported by real world testing.

Well, if you now did watch my video that i posted together with that drawing, then you did see that i did an experiment, that also showed overunity, that though couldn't overcome friction, and it was not completely independent of the hand movement. That is, something that everyone can try oneself, but not that a video only can show. But if you come up with that argument, you had to first see my video.

#### shylo

• Hero Member
• Posts: 540
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #369 on: October 19, 2019, 02:18:18 AM »
I watched your video, and the ones after that too.
There's no overunity there.
Just a circular V-gate.
The problem you had with the spot where the magnet wouldn't align,
Is where the field terminates.
artv

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #370 on: October 19, 2019, 03:08:36 AM »
Just a circular V-gate.
The problem you had with the spot where the magnet wouldn't align,
Is where the field terminates.

No, it is not V-gate, the magnets are at equal distance from the edge of the disk. One thing that can be certainly said, is that it is not V-gate.

Now it was meant to be, that the force near the peak of the first magnet, is equal when moving in both directions. That it is equal, can only be felt by hand in that design. Yet one can feel that the forces really are equal, when doing it oneself. Both are as close to the peak of the force, as possible, and i did all i could to move it as close to the peak of force both times, as ever possible. I also tried it several times, and found that it was so several times, whatever can be the error of the hand, it is not the same several times.

Now considering that the forces in both direction were equal, it moved two times more by the chain of magnets, than in the opposite direction. And the chain of magnets was not V-gate. This indicates overunity.

In theory it should rotate continuously, having such chain of magnets. But it doesn't, because the overunity is not greater than friction.

#### kolbacict

• Hero Member
• Posts: 797
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #371 on: October 19, 2019, 01:56:25 PM »
https://youtu.be/VccPX8Dq6yo
it doesnâ€™t rotate either. This is what I myself came up with.

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #372 on: October 20, 2019, 04:34:54 AM »
Citfta, you think, but do you let me to think?

What to think, is just in general, what do we deal with?

Both your and my experiments are about overunity due to asymmetry of the magnetic field, that is caused by it having two poles.

I think the force when shifting the shield magnet in your experiment is only friction, as it seems to remain constant during all shifting.

In that case it can be considered that your experiment did show overunity, and the measurement also showed it, but again the overunity that cannot overcome friction. And it may be said that my experiment did the same.

Now if true, there are two ways to overcome this. Decrease friction, or increase overunity. In my case for the latter, like maybe the shape of the field can be changed by adding some shielding to every magnet, so that the propulsion would increase. I'm not completely sure about that.

But friction, it cannot be infinitely decreased, and it is greater, the greater are the forces causing it. So it may be a problem that cannot be overcome, better ball bearings may not help.

But it is extremely important to understand and find out what we deal with. No overunity, or overunity that cannot overcome friction. There is a huge difference between the two.

In the latter case we really found overunity, and we showed that in an experiment. Which i think could been the case in my experiment. You maybe have to find out more whether it also could be the case in your experiment. Congratulation then, then you really did show overunity.

Just to see the difference between overunity that cannot overcome friction, and the experiments like these which kolbacict just did, like V-gate. This has no overunity in theory, and also the experiments don't show any overunity. So there is a great difference, the former can be called overunity experiments, and the latter only permanent magnet experiments, playing with magnets.

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #373 on: October 24, 2019, 04:03:23 AM »
The Citfta's experiment with the shield magnet, also has no overunity in the Coulomb model, that is when the poles are considered to be point charges. Correct me if i'm wrong. The attraction and repulsion of the shield magnet will then always be equal for both the left and right magnets, but the repulsion between them will remain the same no matter whether the shield magnet is in between or not. That is by the Coulomb model, it is as if the shield magnet were not there, its effect is zero and it does no shielding.

Thus when there is any overunity in that device, even disregarding friction, that the Citfta's experiment seems to show, then it is again due to the real magnetic fields differing from the Coulomb model. That is again, when there is asymmetry in the magnetic field. In the Coulomb model the fields of the poles are spherical, that is symmetric, and maybe then it can also be said that the magnetic field is symmetric. But real magnetic fields differ from the Coulomb model, and thus may be asymmetric.

The asymmetry of the magnetic field may be seen as fields of the poles not being spherical or such, any difference from the Coulomb model, where both poles are considered to be separate spherical fields. And the distribution of the field strength may also differ due to interaction.

My another two cents.

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #374 on: October 25, 2019, 10:56:33 AM »
That said, i think Citfta's and my experiments should be simulated with FEMM. FEM using Maxwell equations may show the kind of asymmetry that i talked about, and thus maybe also overunity. Some say that some simulations of permanent magnet devices have showed overunity, though they were not physically made showing overunity. Maybe the reason was friction again, i have not studied these cases. FEMM is not very difficult to use as a software, they sure tried to make it as easy to use as possible. But going into the simulation requires certain work of course. FEMM is in Windows though, and i use Linux. And i don't have enough time for such work. Interesting though, neither experiments show overunity by the Coulomb model, do they do by the Maxwell equations.

I think that this is all i can say by now. What i want to say is that the reason for overunity may be a certain asymmetry of the magnetic field, in that when a pole is seen as a point, the field near it is not completely spherical, or not always completely spherical. Different from the Coulomb model where the field around a pole is always perfectly spherical. This is a kind of asymmetry that one cannot easily see. Say we draw a line between the two poles of a magnet, and other line crossing that line perpendicularly in the middle. The field is symmetric at the both sides of the first line, and at the both sides of the second line, a perfect four sector symmetry. Yet it still may be asymmetric in another way, in that the field near a pole may not always be completely spherical.