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: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)  (Read 60685 times)

tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5365
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #30 on: June 28, 2017, 03:36:51 PM »
It really does not matter how the external flux change is generated.  It does not matter if the magnet is being inserted into that ring or withdrawn from it or passed through it.  It does not matter if the magnet is moving parallely the ring's axis or perpendicularly to it (as when a magnet is "passing across").

Analyzing a half of the motion, as in just withdrawing instead inserting and withdrawing (passing through) does not change anything conceptually - it just changes the initial conditions of the analysis.

BTW: It also does not matter if the external flux change is generated by another coil (as in a transformer).  All that matters is that some external flux is pushed into the coil somehow.

The video by the same author shows what happens when that ring is not superconductive.

Faraday's law of induction states that only a voltage across an open coil increases as dPhi/dt increases.
Any current that flows as a result of that voltage will oppose the change in flux that causes that voltage according to the Lenz Law.
According only to Ohm's Law the induced current can grow without limit but when you add in the Lenz Law that limit becomes i=Phi/L.  That limit cannot be exceeded no matter how fast you move the magnet (no matter the dPhi/dt).

But the coil stores and discharges energy as a current source - not a voltage source.
Capacitors store and discharge energy as a voltage source - not inductors.

You are wrong about this.  You seem to be conflating a change in magnetic flux with mechanical force while it is the gradient of the magnetic flux density that determines the force.
Notice that in the video linked below, the magnet is much smaller than the superconductive loop and that allow the flux lines to deform.  Also notice that the number of these flux lines penetrating the loop is ALWAYS THE SAME regardless of the position of the magnet.  These lines do get closer together (denser) at some times but their number stays the same.  It is the gradient in density of these lines that determines the mechanical force acting on the magnet - not the amount of lines.  Such is the difference between magnetic flux density and magnetic flux.

No, you will be able to pull out (or insert) a magnet without any problems and without demagnetizing the magnet.  The lines of flux will bend and remain to maintain the total amount of lines constant, just like in that simulation..  That simulation by prof.Belcher is very accurate and the loop modeled in it is perfectly superconductive.

The only difference is whether the superconductive loop is "frozen" with the magnet inside it or without it.  These are called "initial conditions" when the loops becomes superconductive.

With non-superconductive coils everything works the same way except that the current is slowly dissipated in the resistance just like in an RL circuit.  In such case it is only a matter whether the change in magnetic flux is able to generate the current faster then the resistance can dissipate it as heat.

First off,the original question-->Do you not get more current if you move a magnet across a coil faster? We are assuming a load is placed across the coil/inductor.

My answer to this is yes,and verpies answer to this is no.

Second--there are no magnetic !lines! of flux,the field is like a fluid--no lines of flux,but one smooth field.

tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5365
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #31 on: June 28, 2017, 04:03:25 PM »
The quantity of charge that is displaced external to the coil, dumped in the trough, is Amps*time in seconds,, 1 Amp for 1 second is the quantity of 1 Coulomb,, 6.242*10^18 electrons,, so for a fixed external resistance that quantity will stay the same per cycle.

I would tend to think that the stretchy bucket is like using a changing external resistance.

If we have a voltage potential of say 5 volt's,a current limit of say 10mA,and a cap of say 10000uF--what is the only way the cap could be charged to 4 volts quicker?.

memoryman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 758
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #32 on: June 28, 2017, 06:39:06 PM »
"IMHO Energy does nothing,, power makes things move,, that is energy used over some time period,, but I could be wrong."
We are ultimately only interested in WORK;, which is not conservative.
WORK is done whenever ENERGY moves; potential ENERGY does not do WORK.

Magluvin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5884
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #33 on: June 28, 2017, 07:01:59 PM »
"IMHO Energy does nothing,, power makes things move,, that is energy used over some time period,, but I could be wrong."
We are ultimately only interested in WORK;, which is not conservative.
WORK is done whenever ENERGY moves; potential ENERGY does not do WORK.

Well if you dont have any potential energy, then how will you do work? If you did not eat for 20 days, then you were required to replace the roof of a house, would the roof get done?
If so, then how?
If not then why?

Mags

memoryman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 758
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #34 on: June 28, 2017, 07:31:39 PM »
WORK is the result of kinetic energy, so to have WORK done, the potential has to change to kinetic.

Magluvin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5884
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #35 on: June 28, 2017, 07:36:33 PM »

Second--there are no magnetic !lines! of flux,the field is like a fluid--no lines of flux,but one smooth field.

But how do we know this for sure? Any evidence?

There is no finite definition of what makes up a magnetic field.

I find that lines of force are a very logical explanation and seem to work well with understanding the field in practice. How does claiming it is a fluid help our understanding of how we use it?
How does claiming it as a fluid help our understanding of the difference between N and S polar identities and how they interact with other magnetic fields?

How do we know if the fluid idea that replaces the field lines theory isnt just made up so that we may never fully understand magnetic fields for what they really are?

There must be a mechanism that is the producer of the N and S polarities. Like gravity. If we look at a pool of water and we try to push a sealed bottle of air into the water, the water pushes back.  If we fill the bottle with water and have it submerged in the pool, then we pull it out of the water, it seems like the air is pushing it down.  The difference is that the pool is actually pushing back the air bottle, but it is gravity that is making it seem like the air is pushing down on the water bottle. In the end, it is gravity that is the single cause for each event.

So there must be some polarizing force. Just because we cant see lines of force, it isnt evidence that they do not exist. Can you see the fluid?

Mags

Magluvin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5884
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #36 on: June 28, 2017, 08:11:03 PM »
WORK is the result of kinetic energy, so to have WORK done, the potential has to change to kinetic.

Work to me is getting something done that has an intended purpose. Its not like we see a tornado tearing up the land and say, man, look at all the work being done!

If we have a huge boulder on the edge of a cliff and we only need to remove a grain of sand to allow it to fall off the cliff, we have released potential energy. And if that boulder lands on another cliff below and is again teetering on edge, and we give it a little help off the cliff again, we have again released potential energy. In a way it is a controlled release like a clock mech.

If this boulder dropping is the desired effect, then carrying that boulder back up to the top cliff would entail actual work to get the desired effect. And if pushing the boulder off the cliff in the end does something of value, so called work, its not like it takes the amount of work to get it to the top AND the work being done as the boulder falls, all added up as the work required to get the job done. The work is in the lifting of the rock to store the potential to get the job done. After we do the work to get the rock up there, we dont have to release that potential. Thus the work is only to get the desired effect of getting the rock up there, for what ever reason.

The difference between power and energy is, if there is no energy, there can be no power. Energy is the potential source and power is the measured usage of that energy.

Mags

memoryman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 758
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #37 on: June 28, 2017, 08:19:27 PM »
WORK is a definition in physics; nature doesn't know or care whether you consider it useful. 'Useful' is an interpretation of 'what is'.
Energy is a scalar quantity; power is a vector quantity.
POWER is the rate at which work is performed or energy is converted.

memoryman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 758
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #38 on: June 28, 2017, 08:26:30 PM »
We are 'working' on that.

citfta

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1050
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #39 on: June 28, 2017, 09:23:42 PM »
Back to this one

You need a simple device,, IMHO,,  A 0uf to 10000uf variable capacitor.  Set the cap to 0uf, connect the source and restrain the self acting tendency of the cap so that it presents a resistance equal to the  mA that you wish to allow to transfer.

Of course you will need to stop the transfer short and then allow the cap to "snap" the rest of the way so that you are ONLY at 4V.

What are you talking about here?  What is the self acting tendency of a cap and how do you restrain it to represent a resistance equal to the ma that you wish to allow to transfer?  None of that makes any sense to me.  And how does a cap "snap" the rest of the way to what?  Again, I don't understand what you are talking about.  I have worked in electronics for over 50 years and I have never heard of those terms used when talking about a capacitor.  Do you have some kind of reference for what you are talking about?

citfta

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1050
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2017, 11:29:26 PM »
Thanks for the explanation.  I understand now what you meant.  I think what you are describing would more accurately be called an electrostatic motor rather than a capacitor.

tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5365
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #41 on: June 29, 2017, 01:05:09 AM »
What are you talking about here?  What is the self acting tendency of a cap and how do you restrain it to represent a resistance equal to the ma that you wish to allow to transfer?  None of that makes any sense to me.  And how does a cap "snap" the rest of the way to what?  Again, I don't understand what you are talking about.  I have worked in electronics for over 50 years and I have never heard of those terms used when talking about a capacitor.  Do you have some kind of reference for what you are talking about?

I have to agree with you citfta,as i also have no idea what Webby is talking about ?.

I thought my question was simple
The answer being-the only way to charge the cap to 4 volt's faster,is to increase the current flowing into it.

tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5365
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #42 on: June 29, 2017, 01:07:14 AM »
Here is a thought experiment i posted on OUR

We have a coil with a FWBR attached to it's output leads,so as to rectify to DC.
We then have a cap across the FWBR output,so as to collect the energy produced by the coil.
Lets say that the cap is 100uF.

Test one
We now disconnect one end of the coil from the FWBR,so as we can do an open voltage test.
We move the magnet passed the coil as a set speed,and obtain an open voltage across the coil of say 5 volt's.
We now hook the coil back up to the FWBR,and move the magnet across that coil at the same speed as the open voltage test,and we end up with-say 3 volts across the 100uF cap. So our coil voltage has been limited to 3 volt's-plus the V drop across the FWBR.

Now we replace the 100 uF cap with a 200uF cap.
Now,we know that is we pass the magnet across the coil at the same speed as test one,we will not get 3 volt's across the cap.
BUT-if we pass the magnet across the coil faster,will we be able to get 3 volt's across the 200uF cap ?

tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5365
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #43 on: June 29, 2017, 01:40:56 AM »

Quote
I find that lines of force are a very logical explanation and seem to work well with understanding the field in practice.

Like contour line's on a map,that show elevations --but we know that there really are no such line's on the land mass it self.

Quote
There must be a mechanism that is the producer of the N and S polarities.

Once again,N and S are only a means to indicate direction of flow,much like the suction and delivery sides of a water pump.

Quote
Can you see the fluid?

Do not confuse fluid with liquid

Quote
There is no finite definition of what makes up a magnetic field.

Well no,there is not.
I have my own theory,which i have shared here on a number of occasions now,where i believe the magnetic field produced by a PM say,is a field of positive and negative charge's-where what you call north maybe a positive charge,and what you call south maybe a negative charge.
Two positive charges(N&N) will appose each other,two negative charges(S&S) will appose each other,but a positive and negative charge(N&S) will attract each other.

An increasing negative charge(S) through a coil will cause an EMF of one polarity across that coil,and an increasing positive charge(N) will cause an EMF of the opposite polarity across that coil-and the opposite polarity for a decrease of each charge.

Quote
How do we know if the fluid idea that replaces the field lines theory isnt just made up so that we may never fully understand magnetic fields for what they really are?

Who has shown any signs of there being !field line's! ,that is not flawed ?.

Quote
Just because we cant see lines of force, it isnt evidence that they do not exist.

The scientific method is-we must prove something exist's,not that it must exist because we cant see it,or cant prove it.
We cant see oxygen,but we can prove it exist's.

Magluvin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5884
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #44 on: June 29, 2017, 05:24:06 AM »

Do not confuse fluid with liquid

I have my own theory,which i have shared here on a number of occasions now,where i believe the magnetic field produced by a PM say,is a field of positive and negative charge's-where what you call north maybe a positive charge,and what you call south maybe a negative charge.