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.
 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 159215 times)

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 5175
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #540 on: March 26, 2020, 02:50:14 PM »
ayeaye,I will question you related "magnet : permanent and electro" and "force: positive and negative"

Where/what  is the difference by same dimension 1 inch x 1 inch x 1 inch permanent magnet

C5 ceramic magnet
C8 ceramic magnet

AlNiCo magnet
Samarium XY magnet
Neodymium XY magnet
( later Ferrit-Nitrite)
to give the measureable + or - force  ?  Source ?

When these forces are convertable to electromagnetic forces by F=BIL,attention with the conditionizing
and we know :

The permanent magnets "emitts" forces permanent, N-forces and S-forces

The electro-magnets ( by DC,AC or pulsed DC) "emitts" a.permanent b. periodically N-forces and/or S-forces

and 1 W( for unit Watt !) h DC is not 1 Wh AC ; 1 Wh DC/ 1 Wh pulsed DC ?
IMPORTANT ? W( for physical Work !)= Fs , yes !

in motion we have speed and velocity
with tangential velocity and angular velocity parallel

and the pm/em-forces combination advantage f.e. 70 units pm mmf  + 70 units emf ~ 280 units mmf( Flynn : magnetic actuator Hilden-Brand : magnetic valve)
and extra the emf on/off-switch = zero consume

and the resonant circuit gains

and the double rotor- one cw and the other ccw- on the same shaft principle

and do all this into a virtual protoype/model : soft

Is this experimental stage by your "Coulomb model" ?
With which Coulomb friction kinds and numbers do you work your statements out ?

When yes and you can measure output ≥ input you have overunity result and this means :by actual physical and technical standart commercial :

NOTHING !
Your recognition worth is to compare with 1 Wp TV cell value : +- 10 cents
But this is NOT only you/the experimenter related,for all un-/professionals global up to I.S.S.-orbital
« Last Edit: March 26, 2020, 05:26:14 PM by lancaIV »

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #541 on: March 26, 2020, 03:06:49 PM »
Is this experimental stage by your "Coulomb model" ?
With which Coulomb friction kinds and numbers do you work your statements out ?

No, difference from the Coulomb model for magnetic fields, asymmetry. The experiment and its replication did show gain of energy. In addiition there is vertical energy, not measured, can be utilized like electromechanically, like allow the stator magnet to move a bit, and put coil around it.

It shows that it is possible to get energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field, yes.

Nothing goes ahead with that though, as no one is no more willing to do any experiments, the reason is lack of motivation. But what there is, is enough to show a gain of energy.

#### Floor

• Guest
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #542 on: March 26, 2020, 07:59:49 PM »
@ Norman 6538

Thanks.

I have a request of you, (which I sometimes find, that I myself have not followed follow).

Often I find my self unable to grasp what you are showing.

Please be extremely diligent in explaining your drawings, vids, observations and so on.

PS
Please dont blow up my persona into some kind of bigger than it really is thing.
For example  floor 101 or so on.  I would appreciate this.  These topics are the result
of the participation and cooperation of many and from many views and stances in life.

stay safe
floor
keep up the good work

#### Floor

• Guest
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #543 on: March 26, 2020, 11:35:27 PM »

There exist a wide variety of ATTEMPTS at O.U. with magnets, through what is often refereed to
as asymmetry of the fields. You tube is full of them.

The classic example of this sort of device is called the "V gate" design.

Some V gate designs are rotary, others are linear. There are many variations. Some old, some

Nearly all of the "magnet motor" designs I have seen over the years are some variation of that idea.

Newtons laws of motion are valid and ever present in those designs. Those designs only continue
to move due some amount of momentum and then they stop.  No O.U. there.

The magnet interactions I have focused upon in this topic are of a fundamentally efferent methodology.   Newtons laws of motion are just as present in their operation as in any other
design.

However Newtons laws are to a large extent, the basis of the functioning of the magnetic force shunting / redirecting /shielding designs, although there is more to it / it's more complex than simply that.

IT THIS TOPIC the phrase "magnetic field" referrers only to that three dimensional region around
a magnet in which a magnetic force is measured. The topic does not fundamentally concern itself with field theory.

I have never seen / heard of a truly spherical field around a permanent magnet. The field is
toroid. Basically doughnut shaped. Long and thin if surrounding a long thin bar magnet.
Flattened out if surrounding a wafer magnet. Then there are ring magnets horse shoe magnets
and so on.  Magnetic fields as they are generally found in our world any thing but spherical.

Force from a permanent magnet does not diminish in accord with the inverse square law. NEVER !
The farther from a magnet the force measured is, the more it comes NEAR TO FALLING INTO inverse square law. But both the mathematics and the measurements say that it never actually reaches inverse square.  The force from a magnet is small and unusable way before, it is far enough away to be very near to indistinguishable from diminishing by the inverse of the square of the distance.

The Coulomb model is essentially the same as to say... science has labeled electrostatic charge as a plus and a minus charge and that opposites attract, likes repel.   O.U. with magnets, does not violate the Coulomb model, it is dependent upon it.

Symmetry is defined by a certain sameness.  For example... the left and  right halves of a vase may be
mirror images of one another.  But that same vase may not be symmetrical in terms of a comparison of is upper and lower halves.  The only three dimensional shape which is symmetrical from all 3D points
of view is the sphere. No permanent magnet field is symmetrical from all point of view.

The field of force around a permanent magnet is not a sphere.  But it is common to many magnet shapes that there is a symmetry present... from one or more view points.

On might as well drop discussion of the forces measured within a 3d field as being symmetrical or not, as this is not a cause of O.U. in itself.  It's not a case to argue either for or against. It's a WAST OF TIME in that context.

peace out
floor

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #544 on: March 27, 2020, 12:24:54 PM »

There exist a wide variety of ATTEMPTS at O.U. with magnets, through what is often refereed to
as asymmetry of the fields. You tube is full of them.

The classic example of this sort of device is called the "V gate" design.

You already said that once. I explained and you ignore. Why do you try to make it look like that my experiment was V-gate? Why do you try to mislead people?

"Newtons laws of motion are valid and ever present in those designs. Those designs only continue
to move due some amount of momentum and then they stop.  No O.U. there.
"

Correct for V-gate and all its varieties. All setups don't exactly correspond to the Coulomb model, but the way how this design is assumed to work, assumes a Coulomb model.

"However Newtons laws are to a large extent, the basis of the functioning of the magnetic force shunting / redirecting /shielding designs, although there is more to it / it's more complex than simply that."

FALSE. This doesn't provide overunity. If all the design works only by the Newton laws, then there cannot be overunity no matter how many magnets, how they are positioned, or how they move or rotate.

"Force from a permanent magnet does not diminish in accord with the inverse square law. NEVER !
The farther from a magnet the force measured is, the more it comes NEAR TO FALLING INTO inverse square law."

Yes and this means that near the magnetic poles the Newton law and the Coulomb model then doesn't apply. Not always true and not always this difference from the Coulomb model is utilized, but it's true that the real magnets often at least somewhat differ from the Coulomb model.

"The Coulomb model is essentially the same as to say... science has labeled electrostatic charge as a plus and a minus charge and that opposites attract, likes repel.   O.U. with magnets, does not violate the Coulomb model, it is dependent upon it."

FALSE. A difference from the Coulomb model is necessary for overunity, as with poles with spherical fields there cannot be overunity no matter what is the setup. At that the Coulomb model may to some extent apply to some parts of the setup, but this is not the cause of the overunity.

"The field of force around a permanent magnet is not a sphere.  But it is common to many magnet shapes that there is a symmetry present... from one or more view points."

Yes, but important f is not where the symmetry is present, but where it is not present. And important for overunity is the difference from the Coulomb model, not the setup corresponding to the Coulomb model.

"On might as well drop discussion of the forces measured within a 3d field as being symmetrical or not, as this is not a cause of O.U. in itself.  It's not a case to argue either for or against. It's a WAST OF TIME in that context."

"Tilting the magnet does not change the basic facts"

FALSE.

« Last Edit: March 27, 2020, 03:21:38 PM by ayeaye »

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #545 on: March 27, 2020, 03:22:33 PM »
Citfta, you? Maybe Floor indeed tried to get overunity, but didn't understand something. But what makes it worse, is that he refuses to understand, when explained. If my suspicion is true, these people usually come in two.

#### norman6538

• Hero Member
• Posts: 570
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #546 on: March 27, 2020, 03:35:19 PM »
Floor said "Often I find my self unable to grasp what you are showing.
Please be extremely diligent in explaining your drawings, vids, observations and so on. "
Other folks have commented to me that these videos make the Floor principle clear bt most have said nothing at all which dumbfounds me. So I take breaks once in awhile and look to see who get the importance of the principle.

I tried to show precise parts of the Floor twist concept. We all know that magnets either attract or repel depending on their polarities nearest. But what Floor showed us is they have a 3rd property. When the edges are easily pushed together at 90 degrees they want to twist and either attract or repel when twisted. And the best way to understand that is to take two rectangular magnets in your hands and experience that for your self. Until you do that you are waisting your time at the keyboard. Then make for yourself the very very simple devices  that I showed. Then after you get that inside your head I can take you further.

The first video posted shows how the twist works as the magnets approach each other  and the second shows that resulting attraction being untwisted. That attraction is the "stick spot" that must be  conquered. But in general the resulting twist makes more work than the work required to push the magnets together and then separate them for another cycle.

As I understand Floor was trying to use the twisting to drive reciprocation but I do the opposite because that is what your fingers feel when playing with 2 rectangular magnets.

I am working on my 13th and 14th version of these machines.

Norman

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #547 on: March 27, 2020, 03:44:00 PM »
Floor said "Often I find my self unable to grasp what you are showing.

Please be extremely diligent in explaining your drawings, vids, observations and so on. "

I understand why you think in that way, but he evidently willfully ignores my explanations. I understand that you don't want to see it in that way, and neither did i, but as unfortunate as it is to say, i can clearly see the difference.

Good luck with your experiments. See in what direction the twist takes less energy. Measure the energy of approaching both when the magnets are straight and attracting, and when they are twisted. In that way you can find what trajectory and sequence has less energy, and which has more. Whatever sequences they may be. In that way you can find how to approach the lowest energy potential state with more energy, and leave it with less energy, or vice versa. Because as the magnets differ from the Coulomb model, as the result there may be different energy when twisting in one direction, and twisting in another, and difference of energy in different movements. Again, good luck.

#### norman6538

• Hero Member
• Posts: 570
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #548 on: March 27, 2020, 04:31:06 PM »
Ayeaye you are getting it finally. I could take about 40 photos of various devices I have made in my basement and by experimenting I have learned a lot. Butch Lafonte woke me up and Leedskalnin and Flynn parallel path etc.

And you are right. I can demonstrate magnetic spin in my pendulum that drops from 2 oclock and swings past 10 oclock to noon and then slowly drops back down is affected by that magnetic spin otherwise why would it swing up normally and back down slowly like a feather and stop at 6 oclock.

Once you get the basic principle down you go on to measurements.

#### Floor

• Guest
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #549 on: March 28, 2020, 01:04:53 AM »
eye eye quote

"Why do you try to make it look like that my experiment was V-gate?"

1. I did not say your experiment was V gate.

2. I did not reference your experiment at all / had no intentions to reference it at all.

3. True this ....  what I illustrate in the most recent drawings, is V gate in principle although not precisely / actually V gate

4. I truly had NO intentions that my posts be any reflection upon or comment upon your design.

5. The explanations are given to make it clear
THAT
THIS TOPIC IS NOT ABOUT V GATE VARIATIONS.

Within the internet environment and vernacular of the pop culture of generally bogus / misunderstood magnet mania.....

The phrase "asymmetry of the field" is / was the classic "explanation" of why V gates could, might or did give O.U. .

I'm assuming that you are already aware of the fact that V gates don't work and actually ARE attempts to get O.U. from asymmetry or bumps in the magnetic field.

For a more informed group of people who might stumble across this O.U forum and /or more specifically this topic.....

YOUR insistence upon referring to the methods and devices in THIS topic as functioning due to asymmetry of the fields will be an instant turn off /  reason to immediately disregard the topic / assume that it is just another V gate variation.
Not good.

Now

Do I wish to engage in some infantile and fruitless debate as to whether or not symmetry and asymmetry exist in magnetic fields ?  Since OBVIOUSLY / undeniably THEY BOTH DO.  NO !

It then also follows, that this is at least IN PART / one reason,  why ANY MAGNET WHAT SO EVER, does      WHAT SO EVER IT DOES    to some other magnet.  There fore it has some thing to do with the designs in this topic.

eye eye quote  /  same quote
"Why do you try to make it look like that my experiment was V-gate?"  end of quote

You now understand that....  what     I     have said
1. could imply
2. probably does imply to some
3. did definitely imply to YOU
that your experiment  was a V gate design variation.

BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME, THAT THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE JUST  EXPERIENCED YOUR SELF, is it not ?

CONGRATULATIONS !

I just put you through what YOU have, (I hope unwittingly) been putting me through.
GET IT

4. EVEN THOUGH my motivations for the illustrations were completely without ANY intention on my part to be reflection upon the designs on your topic.
NEXT

2. how many times have you accused me or some other, of some sort of corrupt behavior ?
example  quote from eye eye     "Why do you try to mislead people?"

It's couched in a question... but it is in fact a statement
Not a good behavior on your part.
I could go back and count them, but I think it is you who should go back and do the counting.

eye eye quoting FLOOR
"However Newtons laws are to a large extent, the basis of the functioning of the magnetic force shunting / redirecting /shielding designs, although there is more to it / it's more complex than simply that."                                 an end of that quote

eye eye quote
"This doesn't provide over unity If all the design works only by the Newton laws, then there cannot be over unity no matter how many magnets, how they are positioned, or how they move or rotate."
an and of eye eye quote.

GOT IT / ALREADY HAD IT / SO DOES EVERY BODY ELSE !  The operative word in the above quote "ALL"  Hence my O. U. poster / joke / acknowledgment that O.U. is very officially not possible.  Not a revelation to users who frequent this forum. It does not need repeated.

eye eye quoting FLOOR
"Force from a permanent magnet does not diminish in accord with the inverse square law. NEVER !
The farther from a magnet the force measured is, the more it comes NEAR TO FALLING INTO inverse square law."  an end of quote

eye eye quote
Yes and this means that near the magnetic poles the Newton law and the Coulomb model then doesn't apply. Not always true and not always this difference from the Coulomb model is utilized, but it's true that the real magnets often at least somewhat differ from the Coulomb model.
an end of eye eye quote.

You have a talent for stating the obvious,
but also in a way that tends to invalidate other
poster's statements.  Not good.

I think that Newtons laws do apply.  The case is rather that
Newtons observations commonly lead to conclusions which,
while actually not part of his observations are easily implied.
Those implications are not in their self Newtons laws.

eye eye quoting FLOOR
"The Coulomb model is essentially the same as to say... science has labeled electrostatic charge as a plus and a minus charge and that opposites attract, likes repel.   O.U. with magnets, does not violate the Coulomb model, it is dependent upon it."
an and of eye eye quote of floor.

A quote from eye eye
"A difference from the Coulomb model is necessary for over unity,
an end of eye eye quote

Again I disagree.  And / or some other factor / factors.

A quote from eye eye
as with poles with spherical fields there cannot be over unity no matter what is the setup."
an end of eye eye quote

Again I disagree.  And / or  some other factor / factors.

A quote from eye eye
" At that the Coulomb model may to some extent apply to some parts of the setup, but this is not the cause of the over unity."      The end of quote

No comment.

A quote from eye eye
Yes, but important f is not where the symmetry is present, but where it is not present. And important for over unity is the difference from the Coulomb model, not the setup corresponding to the Coulomb model.  The end of quote
Wrong
in these designs both must be present.

Early on, I suggested / insisted that you make yourself more familiar with this topic before making
assumptions.

Your response was a tit for tat of, why should I watch floor videos, floor should rather watch eye eye's videos.

An example of why I said that you should read the topic......

The subject matter I just posted of (inverse square and Coulomb force).
@
https://overunity.com/16954/magnets-motion-and-measurement/msg525821/#msg525821

which you just gave a response to              was       first     posted    on    09/21/18     HELLO !

that response was
@
https://overunity.com/16954/magnets-motion-and-measurement/msg543986/#msg543986

The discussion leads to the theoretical.  While such is acceptable as an occasional / inevitable
part of discussion, there are numerous other topics on the forum for such.

This is not a theory topic here.

Also, and since you bring it up,  yes,  your design / experiment is a V gate variation.

Please do a better job or else stop posting here.
floor

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #550 on: March 28, 2020, 03:51:30 AM »

1. I did not say your experiment was V gate.

"Also, and since you bring it up,  yes,  your design / experiment is a V gate variation."

Citfta, do you also agree with both of these statements?

I have never seen V-gate referenced as asymmetry of the field. If it works with attraction, It is just a row of magnets, where every next pole is nearer to the stator magnet. It can be V-shape or a spiral on a disk. Because the next magnet is nearer, then certainly it moves towards the stator magnet. This design can be completely modeled by the Coulomb model, and thus cannot have overunity.

Norman, thank you.

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #551 on: March 28, 2020, 01:32:28 PM »
PS Floor, you say that i'm stating the obvious. If i state something that is really true, even when i found it, then it is certainly also obvious. The problem is that you willingly deny the obvious.

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 5175
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #552 on: March 28, 2020, 02:23:39 PM »
ayeaye,probably anybody asked you so I will do it :
What and which is the " ayeaye Coulomb model" ?
Can you give detailed structure and formulation that by this " ayeaye hypothesis model by Coulomb " simulation would be configureable ?

Approvements are ever wellcomed

wmbr
OCWL

#### ayeaye

• Hero Member
• Posts: 866
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #553 on: March 28, 2020, 03:22:11 PM »
What and which is the " ayeaye Coulomb model" ?

There is no "ayeaye Coulomb model". There is Coulomb model for magnets. In the very essence my view is that overunity in permanent magnets is only where are differences from the Coulomb model, and it is caused by the differences from the Coulomb model. May be obvious, but some still willingly ignore it, or confuse or mislead.

Coulomb model for magnets is the model proposed by Coulomb, where all poles have a perfectly spherical field, with inverse square law always applying, even when poles are close to each other. For such model, every pole is considered to be a point, which is usually the center of the pole area. Consider like magnets with poles on large flat sides, think how much the field of a pole by that model there differs from the real field of the pole.

This difference of the field of a pole from the Coulomb model, provides a certain asymmetry of the field. How this asymmetry can cause a gain of energy, can be estimated by knowing the shape of the field. Like, when there is a pole with more field lines on one side than the other, then obviously one gains energy when entering the field with a pole of another magnet, at the side where are more field lines, and exiting the field at the side where are less field lines.

This asymmetry can be called a non-Coulomb irregularity, because in the Coulomb model of the same magnet there is no such asymmetry, and thus there is a difference from the Coulomb model. In spite this is not a very sophisticated approach, it nevertheless enables to estimate the possible overunity in a setup, and makes the research and experimenting much more methodical, instead of just randomly trying and seeing whether there maybe is overunity, like searching a needle in the haystack.

But Floor tries to knock off any such approach in the bud. Instead wanting people to do experiments of his fancy tricks with magnets, where he does not provide a sole real reason why there should be overunity, and leave the experimenters then to blindly try, maybe some overunity sometimes occurs in some of his setups.

That is, the only reason for overunity in Floor's designs he is known to say, is balancing the forces between different poles of the magnets. But this balancing forces can all be modeled by the Coulomb model, thus there is no overunity in such designs. The reason he gives is thus false. He also continuously emphasizes that magnets in his designs are always supposed to correspond to the Newton's law, which is the same as the Coulomb model, in spite incorrect, as Newton did not propose his law for magnets, Coulomb did.

In addition, Floor tries to disregard my experiment, that is in another thread here. Where i measured a gain of energy from asymmetry of the field, and this was replicated by Telecom, confirming the results. Calling it a "V-gate". That is, sometimes saying that it is "V-gate" and sometimes saying that he never said that, confusing the minds of the readers to the extreme.

Trying to explain things to Floor, he willingly ignores all explanations, so explaining to him doesn't help. Not to talk several rude personal attacks by Floor and Citfta against me, for the only reason that i'm critical of their work. Ok, i have been attacked before, and called all names, important is not me as an individual, but the objectivity of the research.

#### Floor

• Guest
##### Re: Magnets, motion and measurement
« Reply #554 on: March 28, 2020, 06:21:55 PM »
@norman6538

Nice work / thanks for time spent,