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 : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Fire wheels  (Read 1488 times)

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 866
Fire wheels
« on: November 16, 2018, 02:29:31 PM »
I will post my last post in my this thread  also here, as it is also about theory. This and experimenting with bifilar coils also made me to think that for overunity in a solid state device, more current should be induced than provided by the Faraday's law. Which is also the reason why simulators may not simulate such experiments, unless changing the equations there or such. This is consistent with the analogy below, with overunity being provided by the orbiting electrons and a rotating electric field, that induces current.

Please write what are your thoughts about that.

I called atoms fire wheels. Atoms resemble wheels, because the electrons orbit the nucleus, they don't exactly orbit, but one may see it like that, as it is what orbiting means in the quantum world.

Fire is somewhat similar to a jet stream, that can affect things remotely.

Why, because like during induction, the atoms in the core (dipoles) induce current when they are more or less side wise towards the wire. Side means side like the side of the wheel. Then the rotation of the electron around the nucleus moves the electrons in the wire forward, just like a wheel. Because such rotation creates a rotating electric field.

During that the atom has to rotate or move more towards or away from the wire, this is why i showed the analogy of the leaf blower. In that increase or decrease of the blow relative to the leaf makes it to move in a certain direction, while constant blow in one direction may only scatter leaves in all directions. This is not a direct analogy, but just to give an idea why increase or decrease of the force matters, while rotational movement alone may not be enough to force things to move in one direction.

And what is the most amazing in that, is that during that process the electrons in the atom do work, forcing the electrons in the wire to move. And in spite of that, they don't lose energy and don't fall to the nucleus, so where does the energy that keeps them orbiting come from? How they usually answer to that question, is that it is not exactly orbiting, it is different. But this is in essence just talking about something else to avoid the need to answer. They are also talking about magnetic and electric field, avoiding the explanation how one comes from the other.

This electrons orbiting nucleus also create something with amazing properties, which they call magnetic field. Which is not exactly field but rather a result of a dynamic process. What this orbiting causes, is a field that is not symmetric, that is not spherical, parallel or in any other way symmetric, in that it has two poles. Why is that special, is that an asymmetric field can theoretically do continues work. Again where the energy there comes from. This looks like the same question as where the energy comes from that keeps the electrons orbiting.

Thus i stated the reason for comparison and explained it in a logical manner.