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

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Place holder for Patrick Kelly Tribute / open source experiment  (Read 8879 times)

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3594
Re: Place holder for Patrick Kelly Tribute / open source experiment
« Reply #45 on: August 13, 2020, 05:12:38 AM »
NRamaswami
Magnets are peculiar things. It takes energy to produce a permanent magnet and yet many say it has no energy within it. This would seem to violate the conservation of energy because as they also say, energy cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed. So if we produced a permanent magnet by adding energy the energy must remain with the magnet and it's field which also implies the energy can be removed because energy is conserved. A magnetic energy storage device if you will.

Strange isn't it?, that some would claim to believe energy is always conserved in every form then in the next breath imply it wasn't in a permanent magnet. So, which is it?... is energy conserved or is it not?.

Regards


The british royal society determined long ago that energy is stored in the permanent magnet.
When magnetic tension is released, a portion of the original flux is released as electrical energy. And
This was mysticised by Ed Leedskalnin in his “perpetual motion holder”.


Mostly a waste, besides the inadvertent losses, you destroy a perfectly good magnet.


Offline onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Place holder for Patrick Kelly Tribute / open source experiment
« Reply #46 on: August 13, 2020, 07:31:17 AM »
smoky2
Quote
The british royal society determined long ago that energy is stored in the permanent magnet.
When magnetic tension is released, a portion of the original flux is released as electrical energy. And
This was mysticised by Ed Leedskalnin in his “perpetual motion holder”.

The great thing about the Conservation Of Energy is it answers many questions. I don't need anyone to tell me whether the input energy is stored in the permanent magnet or not, I know it is due to the COE. Likewise any time the field is diminished the stored energy must be released as a magnetic field change due to the COE. Nothing can be created or destroyed only transformed and all that is present remains present in some form.

I built and tested Ed Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder and it's not like a permanent magnet. Once the coil is energized the cross piece will be held in place indefinitely. Then once the cross piece is removed the stored magnetic energy is released as a field change and produces a current in the coil. The input versus output energy is very similar thus the process is efficient. However it is not like a permanent magnet because once the magnetic field bond is broken there is basically no residual magnetism remaining in the apparatus.

Think about that, the input energy can be stored indefinitely in the PMH then nearly all of it released with basically no residual magnetism remaining. A battery cannot do that, a capacitor cannot nor an inductor and no other storage technologies come to mind. You see the Conservation Of Energy works both ways, we cannot gain anything but we cannot lose anything either.

Sure Ed Leedskalnin was a quack, almost every great inventor is however that doesn't mean he was wrong.

Regards