Author Topic: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment (Read 40690 times)

sm0ky2 · « **Reply #75 on:** January 10, 2020, 05:58:14 PM »

Quote from: ayeaye on January 10, 2020, 05:34:16 PM

Then how do you measure, and what do you measure? And how you then calculate the energy?

You calibrate the weight to known readings in accordance
to your scales.
For instance, if you zero the scales, then hang a weight that
reads 1N, (vertical). Then place them horizontally
and take the same reading on the string tied to the back
While attaching the hook to an immobile object holding the hook still.

and when your magnets (when scale is horizontal, with counterweight)
also pull the scale to 1N, you have equilibrium between both forces.
At this point, you know there are 2N of force between the magnets.
1N towards the magnet and 1N pulling away (spring)
This is your 0.
[edit: this may not read “1N” after you add the pulley, so use the
‘leveraged’ value]

The difference between this point and a 0 reading is total 2N.
Allowing them now to move:
One force will get stronger and the other weaker, reflecting on your reading.

Restricting the pulley 1 rotation (or a whole number increment) you know the distance.
Or you can measure the physical distance of where the magnet moves to/from.

A change in the “weight” is roughly 1/2 of the change of the PE.
Converted to KE by the motion.

If you record the rpm you can use the acceleration equation as confirmation.

sm0ky2 · « **Reply #76 on:** January 10, 2020, 06:44:37 PM »

The springs have a form of “moment of inertia”
I think this is what you are considering “friction”?
It’s difficult to measure this by hand-pulling

By using gravity and a set weight on the pulley
there is a constant acceleration placed on the spring.
now you can watch the readings with more accuracy.
and see the change in acceleration.

ayeaye · « **Reply #77 on:** January 11, 2020, 11:30:10 AM »

Quote from: sm0ky2 on January 10, 2020, 05:58:14 PM

For instance, if you zero the scales, then hang a weight that
reads 1N, (vertical). Then place them horizontally
and take the same reading on the string tied to the back

Great, and who will ever do that. When even my experiment, that is the most simple, no one ever replicates. Overunity research is in such a poor condition, no one ever measures anything.

In addition, all want self-runner. This is like a guarantee that no sef-runner will ever be made, because without measuring, it's like finding a needle in a haystack, practically completely impossible.

We, some people here, feel ourselves uneasy, because the things are not good.

What i would recommend, is to use electronic force gauge, instead of spring scales, because this spring inertia is a real problem. These cost a lot. Maybe some can make ones own, using a pressure sensitive resistor and arduino.

Even then, how to do that. Like you move one millimeter in a fraction of a second. How can one even see the reading, in so short time, Saving the maximum force, or even measuring history with readings and times, trying to use that together with the movement from the video, who ćan say.

But nevertheless the experiments can be done with spring scales. I used a spring scales with 5 N range, to say it again, these did cost $2.46 with shipping, from ebay.

Sm0ky2, can you draw a diagram of how you want your experiment?

ayeaye · « **Reply #78 on:** January 12, 2020, 03:24:51 PM »

What concerns the mu metal shielding, in this linear case, the measurements show that the attraction energy is less at the side of the big magnet, than at the pole of the big magnet. Thus, in this case, the shielding should be put to the side of the big magnet.

This, btw, is somewhat similar to what Naudin said. The attraction is more at the pole, than at the side. So the experiment in a way confirms what Naudin said. But, it is also possible to like, approach from the side, and leave at the top, the way that the attraction is greater at the side. It depends on the trajectory by which we move, what it appears to be. The experiment was about linear movement, movement on a straight line, with the magnet tilted 45 degrees.

Also, the attraction force was not really greater at the pole, but the force decreased more rapidly at the side. Thus, the energy of attraction was greater at the pole, than at the side. Is this the same as saying that attraction is greater at the pole, than at the side, this is a matter of interpretation. Naudin was also rather poorly translated, so it was difficult to understand what he really meant.

What concerns the shielding, it also does other things, like it also takes a part of the pole inside it. So i cannot say that there is any way to apply shielding, to increase asymmetry in that case.

What can be said for certain though, is that such things should be tried and measured separately before trying to make the final device. Because like trying to make a permanent magnet motor, and only then to find that the solution was wrong, is much too wasteful. Thus the importance of these experiments.

ayeaye · « **Reply #79 on:** January 12, 2020, 04:25:27 PM »

The friction is not constant, but it is greater, the greater is the component of the force down, one should understand that. The experiment however showed that the maximum friction at the left side was less than the maximum friction at the right side. The friction was in a way proportional to the measured horizontal force, and the force was less at the left side. Thus that the difference in friction made it to appear that the energy was more at the left side than at the right side, was certainly not true.

The friction force is at the opposite directions when the scales stand still, and when the scales move. The real force at a point is thus the average of the forces measured in these two ways. In my calculation i also calculated the real forces, assuming that the friction at one side was constant, because i couldn't measure with scales moving, at all measured points. This is a good enough approximation. And still by these calculations, the energy was more at the left side, and less at the right side.

What may be possible, is to try to measure moving force from every point to the end of the field. Maybe this would enable to estimate the moving force at more than one point. But the inertia of the spring makes that also difficult. I was only able to measure the moving force by one movement, at both sides.

Please see that i went it through, did all the experiment for the first time, measured the energy gain. Thus also seeing all the problems that there are in doing such experiments. There was nothing, and now there is something, even if not perfect, this is a huge difference, and very difficult to achieve. Columbus egg.

ayeaye · « **Reply #80 on:** January 12, 2020, 06:33:30 PM »

One more idea came to my mind. I don't say that it works, but something to try, and it may work. Considering how this experiment is done. There is a box, and the small magnet is on the lid of the box.

The force gauges are expensive. But there are electronic scales, that are very precise, and quite cheap. Of course they assume an equal distribution of weight, and an exactly perpendicular force.

Attach a hard disc, and a rod on it, to the electronic scale. So that the scale is put 90 degrees, and the rod reaches the small magnet. Then don't pull, but push. I don't know all the details, but when carefully done, this may actually enable to measure forces.

Another idea, that someone else, somewhere else told. Now that works by pulling. Attach a string to the magnet, over a pulley, and attach to the end of it a known weight. Then put that weight on the scales. Somehow make the length of the string adjustable. Then the scales will show the weight of the known weight, minus the force to the small magnet.

This will more likely work, but is somewhat more difficult to make. But people have tried, when putting an electronic scale to stand on its edge, it shows some force. This depends on the construction of the scales, some may not. But that with a weight and a pulley always works.

Also, just pulley, and a very exactly adjusted weight. Weight is the force. And the position of the magnet is exactly where the force to it is that great. This requires some good set of weights. And doesn't enable to measure force when moving, which the previous method may somewhat do, when moving the scales down some way.

ayeaye · « **Reply #81 on:** January 14, 2020, 03:11:46 PM »

As i see it. When using only a pulley and a weight to measure the force. When there is no friction, there is only one force to measure. And the magnet is always at the position where there is such force.

When there is friction, there are two forces to measure at any position of the magnet, instead of one. One is the minimum weight with which the weight still doesn't move up. This corresponds to the standing force. The other is the maximum weight with which the weight still doesn't move down. This corresponds to the moving force.

The real force is the average of these two forces. The friction can be calculated too, which in this case is the static friction, if the static friction is greater. The friction force is a half of the difference between these two forces. The friction in that case is also the friction of both the magnet and the pulley. Except when the friction of the pulley is very small, and can be disregarded.

What concerns the static friction, in that case what we always deal with, is static friction. To find the moving friction, if necessary, the ratio between the static friction and the moving friction should be measured. There is likely no greater static friction in case of dry slippery surfaces. But static friction is greater, like when there are ball bearings in the pulley.

Hope that this may help.

ayeaye · « **Reply #82 on:** January 15, 2020, 11:24:56 PM »

Floor,

"you will find that it requires more work to separate
two magnets in attraction form one another, when they are slid side ways, than the work done when they
are pulled directly apart"

I don't know, there are many trajectories, i measured only the one, where the big (standing) magnet was tilted 45 degrees, and there the energy was greater at the side of the pole. And the movement was linear. It may be very different when we approach from some direction, then turn 90 degrees, and leave. Though it may be very difficult to make a mechanical device that will provide such movement.

Floor · « **Reply #83 on:** January 17, 2020, 08:45:49 PM »

There is NO TIME ELEMENT in a calculation of mechanical work.

One may derive the work done as in the work done to cause acceleration.

The unit of measurement, Newton of force, is itself derived from / based upon, mass and acceleration.
And acceleration of course has a time component within it.
because at least
In theory this is a more fundamental and precise method to derive the unit of force (The Newton) from
mass and acceleration. F= ma

In actual practice it is almost never done done this way.
...........................
A 101.971 gram mass (roughly 102 grams) exerts as weigh about 1 Newton of force (down) in standard gravity

The lifting of (or the falling of) a 101.971 gram mass, 1 meter in standard gravity is = 1 joule of work done as that lifting or falling.

Lifting 101.971 grams 1 meter against standard gravity in 1 second of time is = 1 Watt of power expended.
..........................
A 1 kilogram of mass exerts 9.80665 Newtons of force (down) in standard gravity (roughly 10 Newtons)

The lifting of (or the falling of) a 9.80665 gram mass, 1 meter in standard gravity is = 9.80665 Joules or about 10 joules of work done as that lifting or falling.
...........................
The speed of the lifting and the speed of the falling do not change the amount of energy or the work done AS THAT LIFTING OR FALLING.
The work done / energy expended, to cause acceleration is not taken into consideration in a calculation of the work done as lifting or of the work done as falling.

If one were accelerating a mass horizontally (no gravity involved) on can arrive at the work done through the formula Kinetic energy = 1/2 mass x velocity squared.
This is a different matter, and best to leave acceleration out of the. at this time.
...........................

@ EyeEye

Are you going to set and do a presentation of the work done in separating magnet at different angles and so on ?
I think it would be really grate to see some experiments which are confirmations of some of the other research Ive
seen on the internet.

Lifting 1 kilogram 1 meter against standard gravity in 1 second of time is = 9.80665 Watts (roughly 10 Watts) of power expended.
.............................
1 Joule of energy transferred or work done, in 1 second of time is one watt of power expended.
10 Joules of energy transferred or work done, in 1 second of time is 10 watts of power expended.
..............................
best wishes
floor

PS
Looking at these 2 graphs (attached below) one can see how / why there could be a difference in the two actions.

ayeaye · « **Reply #84 on:** January 17, 2020, 10:14:25 PM »

Quote from: ayeaye on January 05, 2020, 03:49:15 AM

The video https://archive.org/details/asymmsurf2

The result was not what i expected, it appears that the magnet gets more energy at the left side, but with this linear movement it may be so, and it corresponds to how the magnets were tilted in my other experiment. Something like field lines that go to the other pole, bend away faster, and thus the force at the right side decreases much faster, one can clearly see that in the video.

That confirms my this experiment https://archive.org/details/Flcm3 in a measured way.

The following was measured from the video. The angles by which the spring scales were tilted, were considered. At both sides the movement was considered so long, that at the end of it there was no measurable force to the magnet.

At the right side the magnet moved 3.57 mm with the force 0.8 N, and 2.29 mm with the force 1.0 N, thus energy at the right side was 5.15 mJ.

At the left side the magnet moved 17.43 mm with the force 0.6 N, and 6.71 mm with the force 0.4 N, thus energy at the left side was 13.14 mJ.

The force when moving was 1.2 N at the right side, and 0.8 N at the left side. Considering that the force when moving was constant, then the forces considering friction were the following.

At the right side, first 3.57 mm -- ( 0.8 + 1.2 ) / 2 = 1 N, friction 0.2 N, 3.57 mJ, next 2.29 mm -- ( 1 + 1.2 ) / 2 = 1.1 N, friction 0.1 N, 2.52 mJ.

At the left side, first 17.43 mm -- ( 0.6 + 0.8 ) / 2 = 0.7 N, friction 0.1 N, 12.20 mJ, next 6.71 mm -- ( 0.4 + 0.8 ) / 2 = 0.6 N, friction 0.2 N, 4.03 mJ.

Thus the energy at the right side was 6.09 mJ, and the energy at the left side was 16.23 mJ, 10.14 mJ more.

By these calculations, only 4 mJ goes to friction during all movement through the field, 6 mJ should be left. Thus the magnet should go through all the field when starting from the left, and gain speed. Yet, when releasing the magnet from the beginning of the field at left, it stops at the neutral position. I have not tried to make it to go through with an initial speed.

What i would like the most, is someone to replicate this experiment, many thanks.

Floor, i don't do fancy presentations. My experiment was described above, plus all the rest of the data in this thread.

The force of separation between the small magnet and a small disc magnet was 2.3 N. The force of separation between two small disc magnets was 1.8 N.

The force of separation between the big magnet and a small disc magnet was 1.6 N. The force of separation between the big magnet and the small magnet was 2.6 N. At that the small disc magnets always attracted to the edge of the big disc magnets.

The force of separation between two big disc magnets was 5.0 N.

The small magnet was two ceramic disc magnets 10 mm in diameter and 5 mm thick, one on another, and the big magnet was 8 ceramic disc magnets 25 mm in diameter and 5 mm thick, one on another.

ayeaye · « **Reply #85 on:** January 18, 2020, 01:03:13 AM »

These ceramic disc magnets are pretty standard, and easy to get. I got them from supermagnete, i don't even know where else to get ceramic magnets. In ebay, there are many neodymium magnets, but not that many ceramic magnets i think.

ayeaye · « **Reply #86 on:** January 18, 2020, 04:18:58 PM »

Trying to draw the results of my experiment with Bezier lines, it was like that below. Notice that the area at the left side of the y axis is greater than the area at the right side, this area is the energy.

telecom · « **Reply #87 on:** January 21, 2020, 07:22:40 PM »

I've tried something similar with the rectangular magnets I got on hand.
I haven't done any measurements yet, but I've noticed, that on the way out the top magnet is being repelled with a big force,
while on the way in, this magnet is being attracted to the stack.
I will try getting some kind of a fish scale in Walmart, and do the measurements.

ayeaye · « **Reply #88 on:** January 21, 2020, 09:14:35 PM »

Quote from: telecom on January 21, 2020, 07:22:40 PM

I've tried something similar with the rectangular magnets I got on hand.
I haven't done any measurements yet, but I've noticed, that on the way out the top magnet is being repelled with a big force,
while on the way in, this magnet is being attracted to the stack.

I don't quite understand what do you mean. I tried to measure all horizontal force both at the left and right side. But in he end at the both sides, the north pole of the small magnet started to repel from the north pole of the big magnet or something, the small magnet was like in the air, with no measurable horizontal force. Moving further away, the forces went too small. I could not measure any more forces than i did, i could not find no more measurable horizontal forces.

telecom · « **Reply #89 on:** January 21, 2020, 10:14:55 PM »

Yes, exactly, small magnet is being repelled, but it has not only vertical,
but a horizontal vector as well, IMHO. Horizontal vector is in the same direction
as was the attraction on the left side. I will try doing measurements once
get some kind of a fish scale.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment (Read 40690 times)

sm0ky2

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

sm0ky2

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

Floor

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

telecom

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

ayeaye

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment

telecom

Re: Getting energy from asymmetry of the magnetic field experiment