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: 83643
  • *Latest: pubbys

  • *Total Posts: 514927
  • *Total Topics: 15358
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 12

Author Topic: Magnets, motion and measurement  (Read 78984 times)

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #420 on: December 19, 2019, 05:30:30 AM »
I know because I understand it.  Its about balance between attracting and repelling forces giveing rise to
a net neutrality along some vectors.

You omit something essential, greedy simplification. In case of the supposed "shield magnet", the attracting and repelling forces balance each other between the "shield magnet" and the magnet next to it. But this does not balance the attracting and repelling forces between the two magnets at the two sides of the "shield magnet". When the magnetic fields of these magnets on two sides go through the magnetic field of the "shield  magnet".

And it is considered now in science that magnetic field goes through another magnetic field, one field doesn't shield another field. So i say, when you suggest something that differs from that, you claim something theoretically new. And you should then provide a theoretical reason why this happens, and how this happens, and also show experimentally that it happens. Neither of that has been done. This is just the scientific method and doesn't depend on me.

When it remains true that one field doesn't shield another, any effect of shielding is then for another reasons. The obvious reason is that magnets are made of magnetic material, that can act as shield when placed between two magnets. Similar to a piece of iron or other not magnetized magnetic material. This is what i call ordinary shielding.

> Please don't use this topic to attract comments to your experiments / Ideas.

This thread is about "Magnets, motion and measurement", right? So anything that is about magnets, motion and measurement, about all these three, can be in this thread, no matter whether it attracts attention or not, is it so?

> Ive done with all the magnet asymmetry  experiments for now, that I chose to explore, several years ago.
As you have said, not enough to over come friction / other problems.
     I wish you good luck and good hunting in your experiments.

So why are you trying to prevent a certain field of research from going on, by your sole discretion? I said it doesn't overcome friction, in ways it could been done by now. But i *did not* say that the research must be ended for that reason. To the opposite, i want this research to go on. Don't imply me saying that i have not said and that is the opposite to what i think and what i ever wanted to say, please.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #420 on: December 19, 2019, 05:30:30 AM »

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3295
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #421 on: December 19, 2019, 08:10:03 AM »
As I tried to say earlier, “ shielding” is not really a shield, but a diverter
like a “T-pipe”.


it is possible to shield a magnetic field up to our nanotech’s ability.
higher frequency fields can still penetrate even our finest mesh Faraday cages.
As we advance this technology, we may be able to approach the wavelength of
our iron alloys and some ceramics.
Plank tells us our materials physics can never reach a cage small enough to block
the field of rare earth metals.
And absolutely never block higher magnetic radiation.


I think (personally) the diversion option is wasting our magnetic power.
It is better to think like Howard Johnson or how the ‘tractor beam’ works.
Use another magnet to overpower the field, either by compression or absorption
To warp the field and achieve the shape you desire.
Like a spring, a compressed magnetic field retains its’ energy.
Where-as a “shield” sucks it up...

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #422 on: December 20, 2019, 11:09:03 PM »
You omit something essential, greedy simplification. In case of the supposed "shield magnet", the attracting and repelling forces balance each other between the "shield magnet" and the magnet next to it. But this does not balance the attracting and repelling forces between the two magnets at the two sides of the "shield magnet". When the magnetic fields of these magnets on two sides go through the magnetic field of the "shield  magnet".

                                                            You are simply incorrect in this statement. 

Both of  the outside magnets (output magnets) have a neutrality of force in specific vectors (illustrated in certain of the drawings / designs).

There is nothing controverial in that action. 

It only requires a fair degree of precision in matching of the shapes and strengths of the magnets to one another to accomplish this.

The shielding magnet is also neutralized in a desirable vector.   


And it is considered now in science that magnetic field goes through another magnetic field, one field doesn't shield another field. So i say, when you suggest something that differs from that, you claim something theoretically new. And you should then provide a theoretical reason why this happens, and how this happens, and also show experimentally that it happens. Neither of that has been done. This is just the scientific method and doesn't depend on me.

                                                     I do not and have NEVER contend that they do.
                                         As I have said You are not understanding the subject matter.

When it remains true that one field doesn't shield another, any effect of shielding is then for another reasons. The obvious reason is that magnets are made of magnetic material, that can act as shield when placed between two magnets. Similar to a piece of iron or other not magnetized magnetic material. This is what i call ordinary shielding.

                      Yes, once again.. I agree / do not contend otherwise, that IN THE MANNER / SENSE IN WHICH YOU ARE PROJECTING  "one field doesn't shield another"

                     But I do not agree that

"any effect of shielding"....  IS FOR ....  "the obvious reason is that magnets are made of magnetic material, that can act as shield when placed between two magnets. Similar to a piece of iron or other not magnetized magnetic material. This is what i call ordinary shielding."

                                                   There is another aspect / reason for the shielding.
                Although I have also described this aspect / property of magnet interactions ... YOU ... refer to, in parts of these topics.

                                                               
This thread is about "Magnets, motion and measurement", right? So anything that is about magnets, motion and measurement, about all these three, can be in this thread, no matter whether it attracts attention or not, is it so?

                   NO... there are thousnds of aspects to magnets motion and measurement that would be inappropriate at any point in the topic
and others that would be appropriate within the topic but only in the context of the current discussion.

So why are you trying to prevent a certain field of research from going on, by your sole discretion? I said it doesn't overcome friction, in ways it could been done by now. But i *did not* say that the research must be ended for that reason. To the opposite, i want this research to go on. Don't imply me saying that i have not said and that is the opposite to what i think and what i ever wanted to say, please.

                   I am not...  can not and do not intend to "prevent a certain field of research from going on"...

                                                   I CAN prevent it from going on in THIS topic.

             What I have said is a fact.... You have made repeated and incorrect statements and interpretations  of  / about the the interactions I have presented.

                           AND NO .... You are also mistaken if you think I have given you permission to  change this topic in to a discussion of your design / idea.

You bring relevant points to the topic,  but then again...   IF you  have read what I have just posted above, you should
also understand, that as I have said (4th time now)...

            You have been assuming incorrectly ... that you understand the mechanisms / operating principles
                           but also there fore, have been misrepresenting the interactions I have presented.

          Yes I get it, but do you get it that those aspects of / what you define as shielding are not the principle
          of operation here ?
         
                                                                        But also
                                I do hope that you  have / are coming closer to understanding the shielding.   

                                Let go of the idea that shielding is "blocking".  No kind of shielding, not even of a cannon ball
                                by a castle wall is any thing other than a redistribution of forces.


                                                  floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #422 on: December 20, 2019, 11:09:03 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #423 on: December 21, 2019, 03:23:15 AM »
                                                            You are simply incorrect in this statement. 

Both of  the outside magnets (output magnets) have a neutrality of force in specific vectors (illustrated in certain of the drawings / designs).

There is nothing controverial in that action. 

It only requires a fair degree of precision in matching of the shapes and strengths of the magnets to one another to accomplish this.

The shielding magnet is also neutralized in a desirable vector.

No, i don't know what do you mean by that. See the drawing below, this shows your "shield magnet" between two magnets. As one can see, the forces between the left and right magnet there don't balance each other, as you yourself agreed that a magnetic field doesn't shield another magnetic field.

> NO... there are thousnds of aspects to magnets motion and measurement that would be inappropriate at any point in the topic
and others that would be appropriate within the topic but only in the context of the current discussion.

No, your thread is named "Magnets, motion and measurements", also in your starting post you said that this thread is about anything regarding magnets, motion and measurement. You alone cannot decide what is appropriate in this thread and what is not. This is a public forum. And i don't have to create my own thread, but you should create a separate thread about your papers, if you want only these to be discussed. And that too doesn't save you from defending your work, because this is a part of the scientific method.

> Ive done with all the magnet asymmetry  experiments for now, that I chose to explore, several years ago.
As you have said, not enough to over come friction / other problems.
     I wish you good luck and good hunting in your experiments.

I have been in this forum for many years, and i have not seen your experiments about asymmetry. I think you try to discredit me once every month, people better don't talk to me, avoid conflict and submit to tyrants.

I think my spring scales have arrived.


Offline kolbacict

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #424 on: December 21, 2019, 08:36:40 AM »
Quote
With a powerful neodymium magnet you can i think. One taken from an old hard drive, maybe, or maybe it's not strong enough.
A whole bunch of that. no problems.
But, it seems to me there is no fundamental difference between a neodymium and a ferrite magnet.
the device on a powerful magnet will spin faster, but on a weak one it will slow down.
If at all will rotate ... :)
p.s. Why are there no avatars on this forum?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #424 on: December 21, 2019, 08:36:40 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #425 on: December 25, 2019, 09:06:42 PM »
My assesment of the design in the jpg file (below, yours)  is that it is a poor one.  It MIGHT result in some SMALL reduction of force between the outer magnets.  But also the drawing is a very incomplete comunication.  It leaves out too much needed description.
 
Here are those links again, to some videos of effective ahielding.
There are many other videos at that location "seethisvid" channel at daily motion. com


1. this video, titled "amazeing"  @
                          https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6gzr2q

2. or this variation, watch this video, titled "RtAngSld"   @
                          https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x59r978                         

3. or to see a completely different method of neutralizing magnet force as in this video,
titled "TDForceDiagramed"

                            at 2 minutes and 50 seconds into the video
watch                  https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6wfk0d

4. or to see yet another, completely different method of neutralizing magnet actions (by brute force)
see this video @
                             https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x728wd9

5. or to see a completely different method of neutralizing magnet force as in this video, titled "TDForceDiagramed"

6. or watch this video titled "direct approach"  @
                                                                        https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6xgiez

7. or this video titles "Floor's brute force neutralization part 1"  @
                                                                       https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7f0md2

8. or  this video titles "Floor's brute force neutralization part 2"  @
                                                                       https://www.dailymotion.com/videox7f0o4w

                                   SEE THIS "Newton's magnets" PDF BELOW
                https://overunity.com/18137/newtons-magnets/dlattach/attach/171711/


     floor




Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #426 on: December 26, 2019, 04:59:16 AM »
But also the drawing is a very incomplete comunication.

You did not give an answer. Referring to all your videos and papers, saying that the answer is somewhere inside these, is not an answer.

The question is, what shields the forces between the left and right magnets. You in essence said balancing. I showed by drawing that these forces are not anyhow balanced. Unless there is some unknown way how they are, that you didn't explain. I concluded then by Occam's razor, that the shielding between the left and right magnets there should be ordinary shielding by the magnetic material. An ordinary shielding like a piece of iron shields.

The matter is, not the experiments, nor the theory shows that there may be any overunity. Make no mistake, i very much wanted to see the evidence of overunity, even if it's less than friction. But you have not shown that in your case there may be any overunity.

Thus unless you show any theoretical reason why there should be overunity in your case, or show experimentally that there is overunity, there is no importance of your work. One can show many fancy ways how magnets interact, and it may be interesting for some, but what is important in this forum is overunity research.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #426 on: December 26, 2019, 04:59:16 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #427 on: December 26, 2019, 01:51:24 PM »
You did not give an answer. Referring to all your videos and papers, saying that the answer is somewhere inside these, is not an answer.

The question is, what shields the forces between the left and right magnets. You in essence said balancing. I showed by drawing that these forces are not anyhow balanced. Unless there is some unknown way how they are, that you didn't explain. I concluded then by Occam's razor, that the shielding between the left and right magnets there should be ordinary shielding by the magnetic material. An ordinary shielding like a piece of iron shields.

The matter is, not the experiments, nor the theory shows that there may be any overunity. Make no mistake, i very much wanted to see the evidence of overunity, even if it's less than friction. But you have not shown that in your case there may be any overunity.

Thus unless you show any theoretical reason why there should be overunity in your case, or show experimentally that there is overunity, there is no importance of your work. One can show many fancy ways how magnets interact, and it may be interesting for some, but what is important in this forum is overunity research.




You are incorrect that the magnet shields like ordinary iron would shield.  If you replace the center magnet with a piece of iron or steel both magnets would be attracted strongly to the piece of iron.  There would be NO shielding.  In the video I posted measuring the forces with the fish scale that you object to I show that it takes almost no force to move the shield magnet into position.  If I had used iron for a "shield" the iron would have been pulled forcefully into the "shield" position.


Floor has spent countless hours doing his testing and experimenting.  I have learned a lot from studying his videos and PDFs.  If you would actually take the time to study them and try some of his experiments instead of bashing his efforts you might actually learn something.  And if you want to promote your ideas about asymmetry of magnetic fields PLEASE start your OWN thread about that.


Respectfully,
Carroll

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #428 on: December 26, 2019, 02:27:55 PM »
If you replace the center magnet with a piece of iron or steel both magnets would be attracted strongly to the piece of iron.

So you say, then there will be no balancing. Right but, the matter is, magnet can at the same time work as a magnet, and its magnetic material work as a shield. And this magnetic material in the magnet does the shielding, not the magnetic field. The way it shields is then in principle not different from a piece of iron, the only difference then is that it in addition to that woks as a magnet.

Also, in your experiment the left magnet attracted to the shield magnet, that it was not supposed to do. This also may show that the shield magnet worked as an ordinary shield, and the left magnet attracted to its magnetic material, as magnet attracts to shield.

> In the video I posted measuring the forces with the fish scale that you object to I show that it takes almost no force to move the shield magnet into position.

No, moving the shield magnet takes in fact a lot of force there. That is, the force is not great, but the distance moved is great, and thus the energy spent for that is very great. What takes energy in case of ordinary shield, is moving it out from between two magnets, because moving it in and out when there is one magnet, compensates each other, but that it has to be moved out with an additional magnet, is not compensated.

This is why there is no overunity when using an ordinary shielding, even not when disregarding friction. Neither could i see that the forces when moving the shield magnet in, and when moving it out, were equal.

> Floor has spent countless hours doing his testing and experimenting.  I have learned a lot from studying his videos and PDFs.  If you would actually take the time to study them and try some of his experiments instead of bashing his efforts you might actually learn something.

I'm not bashing his efforts. But i'm sorry, i'm not about learning everything that Floor has done, i'm talking about one thing. And this thing happens to be related to what Floor did.

But you are hindering my efforts, don't you see. And not only my efforts. Because then it may go, Floor already found a solution for overunity, thus any research of the asymmetry of the magnetic fields is useless. And then anything about magnets, motion, and measurement, will of course be about what Floor did. Not sure it were right even if it were the case, but in addition, it is also not certain at all that Floor has found any overunity, even a theoretical one.

It of course also depends on you. And if you show by measurements that there is overunity, even when disregarding friction, then i will very highly appreciate you. And one aim of this forum will be fulfilled, the first time overunity was shown, very important for everyone. But we are not there yet, and you yet have to show that there was any energy gain, i said you may disregard friction, or show that there was no energy gain, whatever is true in the reality, in the god's nature, as Faraday said.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #428 on: December 26, 2019, 02:27:55 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #429 on: December 26, 2019, 09:01:16 PM »
Hi ayeaye,

You wrote:
So you say, then there will be no balancing. Right but, the matter is, magnet can at the same time work as a magnet, and its magnetic material work as a shield. And this magnetic material in the magnet does the shielding, not the magnetic field. The way it shields is then in principle not different from a piece of iron, the only difference then is that it in addition to that woks as a magnet.   
Well, this is simply wrong!  Please consider how the magnetic permeability of the material of a permanent magnet changes when it is magnetized by a manufacturer to get a permanent magnet in the end of the manufacturing process.
Before the magnetization, the material surely has a permeability like the so called ferromagnetic materials (a normal iron or ferrite piece) have got i.e. a permanent magnet would attract to them. This is because their permeability is simply higher than 1 i.e. higher than that of the air. And the moment these materials are magnetized by a very strong current pulse, they become a permanent magnet but their magnetic permeability is reduced down very near to 1 ! They are said to be almost fully saturated magnetically.
This means that they as a magnetic material are "dead" and could be almost fully transparent to other magnetic fields as if they were not present at all i.e. they would behave to outside magnetic fields like air. Of course they function as a permanent magnet but they would not behave for instance as a shield like a soft iron plate normally behaves between two permanent magnets for instance. Understand? You cannot say the magnetic material of a permanent magnet can work as a "shield".   

 
Quote
Also, in your experiment the left magnet attracted to the shield magnet, that it was not supposed to do. This also may show that the shield magnet worked as an ordinary shield, and the left magnet attracted to its magnetic material, as magnet attracts to shield.

> In the video I posted measuring the forces with the fish scale that you object to I show that it takes almost no force to move the shield magnet into position.

No, moving the shield magnet takes in fact a lot of force there. That is, the force is not great, but the distance moved is great, and thus the energy spent for that is very great. What takes energy in case of ordinary shield, is moving it out from between two magnets, because moving it in and out when there is one magnet, compensates each other, but that it has to be moved out with an additional magnet, is not compensated.

This is why there is no overunity when using an ordinary shielding, even not when disregarding friction. Neither could i see that the forces when moving the shield magnet in, and when moving it out, were equal.   
   
What you noted for Citfta above is also wrong: the attraction was due to the slightly unbalanced attract - repel forces between the magnets. Member Floor demonstrated how well these attract and repel forces can be balanced so that in his precise setups the moving magnets (call them shields if you like) can be moved with very small outside force. This small force was demonstrated by Citfta too! even if his setup was not as precisely balanced as that of Floor.  Yet you deduce from his video that "moving the shield magnet takes in fact a lot of force, etc".  I understand that you refer to the long distance the "shield" magnets should cover and that this may involve "a lot of" input work but if the input force is very small, then the input work can also be small even though the displacement is long. And confront this with the strong repel force the two facing magnets exert on each other and one of them or both move out. Yes, the initial big repel force would be reduced by the square of the distance , yet the work done by the repel forces "feels" higher than the input work. If you build such setup, you would surely "feel" that... 

Dear ayeaye, have you built a setup Floor has been showing in his videos ? or Citfta has shown?  This is the only way to feel the forces by your fingers and then you can measure these forces by a suitable force meter if you wish to do so. But first a robust and magnetically well balanced setup should be built with as little friction for the moving magnets as possible. 
Quote
> Floor has spent countless hours doing his testing and experimenting.  I have learned a lot from studying his videos and PDFs.  If you would actually take the time to study them and try some of his experiments instead of bashing his efforts you might actually learn something.

I'm not bashing his efforts. But i'm sorry, i'm not about learning everything that Floor has done, i'm talking about one thing. And this thing happens to be related to what Floor did.

But you are hindering my efforts, don't you see. And not only my efforts. Because then it may go, Floor already found a solution for overunity, thus any research of the asymmetry of the magnetic fields is useless. And then anything about magnets, motion, and measurement, will of course be about what Floor did. Not sure it were right even if it were the case, but in addition, it is also not certain at all that Floor has found any overunity, even a theoretical one.

It of course also depends on you. And if you show by measurements that there is overunity, even when disregarding friction, then i will very highly appreciate you. And one aim of this forum will be fulfilled, the first time overunity was shown, very important for everyone. But we are not there yet, and you yet have to show that there was any energy gain, i said you may disregard friction, or show that there was no energy gain, whatever is true in the reality, in the god's nature, as Faraday said.
It is funny your saying: "you are not about learning everything that Floor has done".   If your circumstances are such that precise and robust mechanical construction is not readily possible or available for you, that is understandable.  But in this case you are not in a position to compare his setup to your research on the assymetry of magnetic fields.  Let me ask: what is your problem with "And then anything about magnets, motion, and measurement, will of course be about what Floor did." ?   If you do not wish to evalute Floor setup in practice, built as Floor did, then there is no comparison base between his and your research, hence no sense for worry. 

Sorry to chime in with this long post, hopefully this helps you, I am not against you or anyone else, just try to clarify mistakes, wrong interpretations.   

Merry Christmas to you all!
Gyula

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #430 on: December 27, 2019, 01:29:50 AM »
Well, this is simply wrong!

How can you so simply say that? Magnetic permeability changes on different magnetic materials, and we don't even know what the magnetic permeability was on the magnets used in that experiment, also how strongly they were magnetized.

The matter is, Floor said, it is not about ordinary shielding. But gave no explanation whatsoever what the shielding there is caused by. Thus i conclude by Occam's razor that it may be caused by an ordinary shielding.

It's like you see that two people are against each other, and rushed to defend one of them. But it is not about people, we have to find out how it really is.

I didn't come to this forum because of my desire to subordinate to authorities, i came here for a very different reason. If one has a desire to subordinate to authorities, then there are much better places for that than this forum.

> the attraction was due to the slightly unbalanced attract - repel forces between the magnets

And they were very well balanced when moving the shield magnet out, you said it required very little force. Something doesn't add up there, or does?

> I understand that you refer to the long distance the "shield" magnets should cover and that this may involve "a lot of" input work but if the input force is very small, then the input work can also be small even though the displacement is long. And confront this with the strong repel force the two facing magnets exert on each other and one of them or both move out.

I calculated the input and output energies there, in this very thread, and found that the input energy was considerably greater, in most due to the energy of moving the shield magnet. Which may be because of friction, but may also be due to energy needed to move an ordinary shielding. I did these calculations in this same thread, you criticize me, but it seems that you don't even read what i write, even if it is relevant to the matter.

> If your circumstances are such that precise and robust mechanical construction is not readily possible or available for you, that is understandable.  But in this case you are not in a position to compare his setup to your research on the assymetry of magnetic fields.

This doesn't follow. I also don't think that Floor is ever going to replicate my experiment. But in my experiment i measured input and output energies, and output was greater. Also i provided an explanation what it is likely caused by, iron filings show asymmetry of the magnetic field, which i also showed. So my experiment was better in that respect, it provided a clear and consistent result, different from the Floor's experiment where is not clear what it does or does not show, or does it show anything relevant to overunity. Even in spite that i didn't measure the initial forces, but moved it as close to the peak as possible. All was not measured in the Citfta's experiment either, if it were properly measured, we could now say for sure whether the effect was caused by ordinary shielding or not, but it cannot be said by now.

What i appreciate about Citfta though, was that the first time i saw that the forces were really measured. This was a great step forward. And in spite it was difficult, i was able to do the energy calculations based on his video, capturing the experiment in video alone was enough to enable that.

> Let me ask: what is your problem with "And then anything about magnets, motion, and measurement, will of course be about what Floor did." ?   If you do not wish to evalute Floor setup in practice, built as Floor did, then there is no comparison base between his and your research, hence no sense for worry.

So i shouldn't worry, if all research would be ended but Floor's, i should think it's ok. Very weird conclusion and doesn't make no sense at all.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #430 on: December 27, 2019, 01:29:50 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #431 on: December 27, 2019, 07:55:55 AM »
Merry Christmas to you all!

I never got such messages during these holidays. But people have tried to discredit me before, then turned out to be wrong. This is like an experience of my life, this defending myself is what i used to do all my life.

But anyway, happy holidays to you all. And we will show that there is overunity one day, beyond doubt, the way that no one can no longer deny.


Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #432 on: December 27, 2019, 10:39:18 PM »
Here are some good explanations of how and why these devices work.

see attachment below

 floor

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #433 on: December 28, 2019, 12:42:42 AM »
Hi ayeaye,

Quote
How can you so simply say that? Magnetic permeability changes on different magnetic materials, and we don't even know what the magnetic permeability was on the magnets used in that experiment, also how strongly they were magnetized. 

If you did not understand what I wrote on this as an explanation in my previous mail then why do not you say that?  Your answer clearly indicates you can only mention generalities in an attempt to argue with me. 
It does not matter what the permeability of the magnetic materials had before these materials got magnetized and became permanent magnets. After the magnetization, the permeability falls down to near 1 i.e. to that of the air. Ceramic magnets have a permeability of 1.2 to 1.6 or so, Neo magnets have 1.05 to 1.2 or so, etc. If you place say a ceramic (i.e. ferrite) magnet into an air cored solenoid coil and monitor the self inductance of the coil with an L meter, you would find the inductance value would increase very little with respect to the air core case (I tested this many years ago, with different types of permanent magnets).
What does this test tell you on the magnetic permeabilty of permanent magnets? Shielding is out of question in this sense due to the near 1 magnetic permeabilty. I did not simply say just out of thin air that you were wrong in this respect. 
Quote
I didn't come to this forum because of my desire to subordinate to authorities, i came here for a very different reason. If one has a desire to subordinate to authorities, then there are much better places for that than this forum.
 
The only 'authority' on a technical forum should be replications of empirical results the forum members demonstrate. But you do not wish to fully replicate Floor's or Citfta's setups as they demonstrated, you simply misunderstand and criticize their setups. So what? 
You say Floor would not replicate your setup. What if he is already at a more advanced experience level with magnets than you and he simply thinks in his head that his setups are better than yours? I just speculate this as a possibility, do not take this to your heart... 
 
I wrote I am not against you, I simply pointed out your misinterpretations with their setups. It is unfortunate and it is your choice if you consider this situation as you are being a subordinate here, nobody implied that. Floor kindly asked you at least twice to start your own thread and do not discuss your own setup and research on the assymetry of magnetic fields in this thread. 

Quote

> the attraction was due to the slightly unbalanced attract - repel forces between the magnets

And they were very well balanced when moving the shield magnet out, you said it required very little force. Something doesn't add up there, or does? 


I do not see controversy: in Citfta's setup the magnetic balancing was not much precise (like for instance it was in Floor's setups) but with that small unbalance of the attract - repel forces the input force needed for moving the magnets was still much lower than the output force gained from the strong facing like poles. 

Quote
> Let me ask: what is your problem with "And then anything about magnets, motion, and measurement, will of course be about what Floor did." ?   If you do not wish to evalute Floor setup in practice, built as Floor did, then there is no comparison base between his and your research, hence no sense for worry.

So i shouldn't worry, if all research would be ended but Floor's, i should think it's ok. Very weird conclusion and doesn't make no sense at all. 

I wrote you should not worry about what Floor did in this thread if you do not want to evalute his setups in practice: 
1) it is his thread and readers here may or may not agree with his findings in the end and 
2) you have written wrong interpretations on his setups what he objected and asked you to start your own thread.   
Quote

But anyway, happy holidays to you all. And we will show that there is overunity one day, beyond doubt, the way that no one can no longer deny.

 Amen! 

Gyula

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #434 on: December 28, 2019, 07:37:43 AM »
It does not matter what the permeability of the magnetic materials had before these materials got magnetized and became permanent magnets. After the magnetization, the permeability falls down to near 1 i.e. to that of the air.

You try to make it look like that i meant something else than i said, that was wrong. Attack against strawman.

So you say the magnets are always magnetized up to the saturation. This is not always the case. I also have some weakly magnetized iron magnets, and they act as a shield, i tried it. So by you they couldn't, as you want to say that everything that gets magnetized, is saturated and can no more act as a shield. One cannot agree that this is always true.

But my argument was general, yes, i didn't exclude any other unknown ways of shielding, if there are any at all. I only said that because Floor did not explain at all how the shielding in his experiments happens, in spite that he was asked, then by Occam's razor it should be assumed that it was an ordinary shielding. But if there are any other ways of shielding, then also it is not known whether they act the same way as an ordinary shielding what concerns attraction to the shield, and then also likely these experiments provide no overunity.

> I do not see controversy: in Citfta's setup the magnetic balancing was not much precise (like for instance it was in Floor's setups) but with that small unbalance of the attract - repel forces the input force needed for moving the magnets was still much lower than the output force gained from the strong facing like poles.

It looks like that you don't understand what you say here. And no, i calculated that the input energy was much greater than the output energy, exactly because the energy of moving the shield magnet was too great.

> What if he is already at a more advanced experience level with magnets than you and he simply thinks in his head that his setups are better than yours?

This is exactly the way of thinking that shouldn't be in science. And this is exactly what causes the authority that can prevent others from doing research.

> I wrote I am not against you, I simply pointed out your misinterpretations with their setups.

No you didn't. And no, i cannot believe that you are not against me, you try to make it look like that i'm ignorant even when i didn't say anything ignorant. When one's aim is not finding the truth but something else, like authority, then when criticized, they feel like it is a situation of you or them, because when that is found, they are lost. So they see the only alternative to eliminate the opponent, trying for that to have as many people who support them as possible. And the best, also maintaining good relations with the one they try to attack, making them to agree with the attack against them. As you see you try to say that you are not against me.

But it is exactly that in the research, people shouldn't matter, but finding how it really is should matter. You are though talking much too much about me.

> it is his thread

No, this is a public forum and no one owns the threads. What can be talked in the thread is thus determined only by the topic. Like if Floor created a separate thread about his papers, like "Floor's papers on magnets", then sure i didn't talk there about anything else than his papers.

And yes i'm not against Floor talking about his work here, or anywhere, and if he does, i don't anyhow try to prevent it. Even if i don't agree with what he says, he has a right to say that.

> you have written wrong interpretations on his setups what he objected and asked you to start your own thread

I have not, and now you try to say that as you think that you succeeded to falsely discredit me, then this should take from me all my rights. That too is not true, even if i were wrong, this doesn't take from me all my rights.

> Amen!

Good that you agree with something, but what i said was not in the name of the Egyptian god.

But OK, this is what i propose. Try to measure overunity when disregarding friction. I think this is an achievable goal, and the goal i think there should be first.

This is not worth and should be disregarded, as Floor says. No, this is doing it wrong way around. First do this, so that we have a measured overunity, in spite useless, and then think how to go ahead. But then we at least know where the overunity is.

I found it is in the asymmetry (irregularity) of the magnetic field. Evidence like iron filings show that, and my experiment also likely shows that.

If there is also another way to get overunity, like Floor says, the better, but it should be measured first. And when measurements indeed show such overunity, then it should be found what it is caused by. But so far there is no evidence of the overunity that Floor suggests, and there is a question whether there is any. Floor should provide at least some evidence that there may be any overunity, either theoretically or by experiment, otherwise it is not worth considering. I don't reject all the other great work that Floor did, that all can be useful, but this forum is about overunity.

« Last Edit: December 28, 2019, 10:28:47 AM by ayeaye »

 

OneLink