# Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

## Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: nix85 on October 05, 2020, 04:16:36 AM

Title: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 05, 2020, 04:16:36 AM
This is strange and possibly the reason i got so little voltage from my all N rotor magnets and aircore toroid stator.

We all know when magnet approaches a normal coil you get voltage in one direction, 0 in the middle and opposite voltage as it crosses the other side of the coil.

All sweet. But look at this. I suggest you watch the whole vid but first 4 and half min are more important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw

When he sweeped that coil exposing just one side to field, he got AC voltage, first small negative voltage from side N flux, then higher positive voltage as coil passed the center of the magnet and then suprisingly JUST AS HIGH or even higher negative voltage as coil crosses from strong central S flux to weak side N flux...

If you look at 3:23 he does it again, it really produces equal voltage in both directions using just one side of the coil and sweep in just one direction. Slow it down to 0.25x and you will see clearly a full AC spike from one sweep to the left.

But when he crosses the magnet across the coil horizontally using both sides of the coil, in usual manner, the second spike is lower.

What troubles me is does this mean we cannot use only N poles to induce DC voltage over aircore toroid?

Has anyone tried this? If not, i'd appreciate if you do, i tore my toroid apart so can't do it at the moment.

It is crucial that we know this. Does single pole really produce equal voltage in both directions due to sudden change of flux from dense central flux to much weaker opposite side flux.

When i gave it bit more thought it can't be any other way, significant change of flux must produce voltage, it's just that induction is usually not done this way so we tend to forget that just cause you are using one pole does not mean you will get DC.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 05, 2020, 12:17:10 PM
When i gave it bit more thought it can't be any other way, significant change of flux must produce voltage, it's just that induction is usually not done this way so we tend to forget that just cause you are using one pole does not mean you will get DC.
You are confusing induced voltage with induced current.
Also, you are conflating the behavior of an unloaded (or open) coils with loaded (or shorted coils).

Finally, you are not accounting for the return flux of the permanent magnet.

To stir you mind, I will write that when an ideal coil is shorted and the return flux of the permanent magnet is kept away in such manner that it does not enter that coil as it is moved, then the current induced in that coil is unipolar. You may call it pulsating DC.
This video (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) illustrates this unipolarity of the induced current.

However, when the coil is open, while all other things are kept the same, then no current flows in the coil but the voltage induced across its terminals is bipolar according to the Lenz law.
Namely, one polarity of voltage when the amount of flux encompassed by the coil increases and the opposite polarity of voltage when that flux decreases.

All of this has already been discussed in this thread (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3721.0) started by TinMan.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: shylo on October 05, 2020, 04:58:38 PM
Hi Verpies
In your unipolarity video, can we not collect twice? Positive one way ,negative the other?
I can't access the Tinman thread ,you need to be a member of OUR
I use half bridges on each coil leg to feed the caps, but loading the caps in a split manner eliminates lenz drag.
Split the caps  between the half bridges.
Thanks artv.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 05, 2020, 06:31:41 PM
You are confusing induced voltage with induced current.

No, i'm not, i am talking about voltage here, current is irrelevant here.

As for current, it will be in-phase with voltage unless we go into very high inductance coils and high frequencies (ala Hanes). For normal alternators reactance will be minimal. This is denoted as power factor and is usually above 0.9 for most alternators meaning 10% or less power is consumed by inductive reactance.

Quote
Also, you are conflating the behavior of an unloaded (or open) coils with loaded (or shorted coils).

I am not conflating anything, i am talking about induced voltage in unloaded coil but there is no significant difference for loaded coil within usual parameters.

Quote
Finally, you are not accounting for the return flux of the permanent magnet.

Not true, i mentioned return flux or side flux multiple times.

Quote
To stir you mind, I will write that when an ideal coil is shorted and the return flux of the permanent magnet is kept away in such manner that it does not enter that coil as it is moved, then the current induced in that coil is unipolar. You may call it pulsating DC.
This video (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) illustrates this unipolarity of the induced current.

Not true, with or without return flux, as coil passes the edge of a magnet and enters a zone where thick flux is absent opposite voltage will be induced according to dB/dT.

Quote
However, when the coil is open, while all other things are kept the same, then no current flows in the coil but the voltage induced across its terminals is bipolar according to the Lenz law.

No current in open circuit, who would say. With current or without, induced voltage polarity is the same.

Read my post again, watch the video again, there is a difference when he sweeps that coil with one side across the magnet vertically and when he sweeps magnet across both sides of the coil horizontally. Both produce AC voltage but in second one second spike is lower.

Quote
Namely, one polarity of voltage when the amount of flux encompassed by the coil increases and the opposite polarity of voltage when that flux decreases.

All of this has already been discussed in this thread (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3721.0) started by TinMan.

AC voltage is produced in both scenarios, shorted or not, with side flux or not.

Take a single wire to keep it simple, sweep it across a magnet, as it enters the field you get voltage in one direction and as it leaves in opposite. Short the wire and you will get same voltage with insginificant difference of coil's backEMF when it's shorted.

I suggest you study lenz, here are few videos to start.

https://youtu.be/bkSsgTQOXVI < first part of this vid is misleading, if flux in same direction increases or decreases over both sides of the coil at the same time no voltage will be induced as shown in next vid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NDztGfWpe4

Few general rules to keep in mind..

First pic below, as north pole of a magnet sweeps across the wire, electrons will first go up and as magnet leaves the wire they will go down.

Two left hand rules..

If wire is placed perpendicular to a N-S field and electrons in the wire are going to the right, wire will experience a downward force.

If electrons coil into the screen in up part of the coil as shown north pole will be on the right.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 05, 2020, 08:53:46 PM
...current is irrelevant here.
Current is very relevant for coils. It is a major phenomenon of inductive energy storage and without it a coil does not store energy nor oppose external flux not attracts not repels anything.  In other words, a coil without current  is a Nothing Burger.
Also, current is directly proportional to the magnetic flux generated by the coil* since the inductance of a coil is the ratio of its flux to the current flowing through it, in mathspeak: L=Φ/i   or  i=Φ/L.

* or an external flux attempting to change the total flux penetrating a closed coil

Not true, with or without return flux...
Let's talk about it

I am not conflating anything
But you are.
Take a look at the piece of our discussion below.  I wrote about current but you countered with an argument about voltage.

Quote from: verpies
To stir you mind, I will write that when an ideal coil is shorted and the return flux of the permanent magnet is kept away in such manner that it does not enter that coil as it is moved, then the current induced in that coil is unipolar. You may call it pulsating DC. This video illustrates this unipolarity of the induced current.
...as coil passes the edge of a magnet and enters a zone where thick flux is absent opposite voltage will be induced according to dB/dT.

Note, that in that exchange above you made a tacit assumption, that the direction of the voltage induced in an open coil unequivocally determines the direction of the current induced in that coil when it is shorted.

Also, you made a mistake writing that the voltage induced across an open coil depends on dB/dt.
This is wrong because the induced voltage across an open coil does not depend on the rate of change of magnetic flux density at all.  It depends only on the rate of change of magnetic flux, in mathspeak: dΦ/dt.

As for current, it will be in-phase with voltage...
Here you probably assumed that it works the same way as with a resistor when the direction of voltage applied to a resistor unequivocally determines the direction of current flowing through that resistor.
However that voltage vs. current relationship is not true for an inductor.

i am talking about induced voltage in unloaded coil but there is no significant difference for loaded coil within usual parameters.
I beg to differ.
Also, the direction of the induced voltage in an open ideal coil does not determine the direction of the induced current in that coil when it is shorted.  This is not a resistor!
That's why analyzing coils only with induced voltage leads you down the garden path.
Last, but not least it is impossible to even measure the induced voltage in an ideal shorted coil.

This is denoted as power factor and is usually above 0.9 for most alternators meaning 10% or less power is consumed by inductive reactance.
First of all now you are conflating power with energy. Power is the rate of change of energy so it cannot be consumed by definition.
Energy cannot be consumed either but it can be converted to other forms of energy.

However, my most important objection to the quote above is that inductive reactance does not consume energy permanently, because pure inductive reactance stores the energy as magnetic flux and then converts all of it back to electric current.
Notice that this cannot even be properly analysed with pure induced voltage without the consideration of the current flowing in the inductor.

Not true, i mentioned return flux or side flux multiple times.
OK, I grant you that you did but you do not seem to consider it in your analysis of an open coil being waved in front of a naked permanent magnet.

With current or without, induced voltage polarity is the same.
This statement is not even wrong until you notice that it is impossible to measure the induced voltage in an ideal shorted coil.

...watch the video again, there is a difference when he sweeps that coil with one side across the magnet vertically and when he sweeps magnet across both sides of the coil horizontally. Both produce AC voltage but in second one second spike is lower.
I do not see anything unusual in this video but I see a lot of misunderstanding what is happening and the constant assumption that the direction of the induced voltage somehow unequivocally determines the direction of the induced current like in a resistor according to Ohm's law.
Did you watch the video that I have linked from prof. Belcher and noticed that the direction of the induced current does not change?

AC voltage is produced in both scenarios, shorted or not, with side flux or not.
Of course, the total flux* penetrating the coil varies up and down and that induces voltage across an open coil in both direction.  There is nothing unusual about it according to Faraday's law.
Notice, that the video shows only an open coil being measured so you remark "shorted or not" is Ad Hoc.

* that also includes return flux.

Take a single wire to keep it simple, sweep it across a magnet, as it enters the field
Notice that as it is being swept across a naked magnet the first thing it encounters is the return flux.

you get voltage in one direction and as it leaves in opposite.
Yes, that's the Faraday's law, but it has nothing to do with magnetic flux density dB/dt.
Also, with small coil and large magnet you get two double voltage pulses because it:
1) starts encompassing the return flux.
2) stops encompassing the return flux.
3) starts encompassing the flux at the magnet's surface.
4) stops encompassing the flux at the magnet's surface.

Short the wire and you will get same voltage
First of all, it is impossible to measure the voltage across an ideal wire.
Also, an ideal short forms an ideal 1-turn loop/coil with the ideal wire.

The direction of the induced current flowing in that loop/coil will be the same in cases 1 & 2 and the same but opposite in cases 3 & 4.  The direction of the current in cases 2 & 4 will be opposite, because the direction of the magnet's return flux is opposite to its surface flux.
The magnitude and direction of the induced current will generate magnetic flux that will oppose any attempt to change the total flux encompassed by this shorted coil. In consequence the total flux encompassed by the coil will remain constant.
Notice that the direction of the current induced in a shorted coil DOES NOT follow the direction of the voltage induced in the same coil when it is open.  You do not appear to know that and that is why I wrote that you are conflating the behavior of an unloaded (or open) coils with loaded (or shorted coils).

I suggest you study lenz, here are few videos to start.
Don't assume that this a new topic for me. I have been through it many times on this and other fora.

Notice, that the Lenz's law is a qualitative law that specifies the direction of induced current, but states nothing about its magnitude.
Also, sometimes it is said that the Lenz's law is manifested as the minus sign in the Faraday's law ε= - dΦ/dt.
That minus sign refers to your voltage induced across an open coil by a changing flux. Note the concept of this voltage fails the Ohm's law in a shorted ideal coil (just look at the magnitude of the result!) and that is one of the many reasons why it is better to analyze coils in the current domain than voltage domain....and the capacitors - just the opposite.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 05, 2020, 09:10:11 PM
...
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 05, 2020, 10:48:52 PM
Current is very relevant for coils. It is a major phenomenon of inductive energy storage and without it a coil does not store energy nor oppose external flux not attracts not repels anything.  In other words, a coil without current  is a Nothing Burger.
Also, current is directly proportional to the magnetic flux generated by the coil* since the inductance of a coil is the ratio of its flux to the current flowing through it, in mathspeak: L=Φ/i   or  i=Φ/L.

* or an external flux attempting to change the total flux penetrating a closed coil
Let's talk about it

And sky is blue.... Yes, current is needed to produce all the fancy magnetic effects and there was zero need to waste server space with that.

Once again current will bi in phase with voltage for all normal conditions and therefore is irrelevant in the context. Unless we are talking very high inductance and/or frequency, extreme cases.

Quote
But you are.
Take a look at the piece of our discussion below.  I wrote about current but you countered with an argument about voltage.

You are conflating by replying about current when my post was about voltage.

Quote
Note, that in that exchange above you made a tacit assumption, that the direction of the voltage induced in an open coil unequivocally determines the direction of the current induced in that coil when it is shorted.

It does, except if we are talking backEMF in DC motor that only lowers the input current and thus self regulates motor speed. In other words, current never flows in direction of that backEMF, it only reduces input voltage and current.

Quote
Also, you made a mistake writing that the voltage induced across an open coil depends on dB/dt.

This is wrong because the induced voltage across an open coil does not depend on the rate of change of magnetic flux density at all.

Facepalm..

Quote
It depends only on the rate of change of magnetic flux, in mathspeak: dΦ/dt.

dB/dT is perfectly valid expression of Farraday's law.

https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-derive-the-Maxwell-Faraday-equation-from-Faradays-law

Quote
Here you probably assumed that it works the same way as with a resistor when the direction of voltage applied to a resistor unequivocally determines the direction of current flowing through that resistor.
However that voltage vs. current relationship is not true for an inductor.

I did not assume anything. The root of your confusion is in your "professor's" animation.

I gave you one example where induced voltage does not produce current in same direction, but this is an exception to the rule.

Quote
I beg to differ.
Also, the direction of the induced voltage in an open ideal coil does not determine the direction of the induced current in that coil when it is shorted.  This is not a resistor!

Another facepalm..

Quote
That's why analyzing coils only with induced voltage leads you down the garden path.

And another..

Quote
Last, but not least it is impossible to even measure the induced voltage in an ideal shorted coil.

Impossible you say.. Have you ever seen a distribution of voltage across a loop of wire. Did it not cross your mind that opposite sides of the loop will have 1/2 of induced voltage between them. Never crossed your mind did it.

Quote
First of all now you are conflating power with energy. Power is the rate of change of energy so it cannot be consumed by definition.

Again you cling to semantics trying to sound smart but you turn out just the opposite. Here, learn something, quoting from the thread i posted here the other day...

https://overunity.com/18592/few-general-formulas/

Force = Mass * acceleration
Work = Change in Energy
Work = force * distance moved unit: newton meter or joule or Work = Mass * Gravity * Height
Power = work / time = force * displacement / time = force * velocity
Power (hp,watt) = work(ENERGY)/time aka time rate of energy transfer
Energy = Power x Time

Quote
Energy cannot be consumed either but it can be converted to other forms of energy.

We got a genius here! :)

Quote
However, my most important objection to the quote above is that inductive reactance does not consume energy permanently, because pure inductive reactance stores the energy as magnetic flux and then converts all of it back to electric current.
Notice that this cannot even be properly analysed with pure induced voltage without the consideration of the current flowing in thee inductor.

Reactive power consumes energy through copper losses P = I²R. Eh

Quote
OK, I grant you that you did but you do not seem to consider it in your consideration of an open coil being waved in front of a naked permanent magnet.

You have no idea what you're saying, do you.

Quote
This statement is not even wrong until you notice that it is impossible to measure the induced voltage in an ideal shorted coil.

Already addressed that nonsense. We are not talking superconductors here, voltage will be distributed evenly across the coil and opposite sides will have 1/2 of the induced voltage between them.

Quote
I do not see anything unusual in this video but I see a lot of misunderstanding what is happening and the constant assumption that the direction of the induced voltage somehow unequivocally determines the direction of the induced current like in a resistor according to Ohm's law.

There sure is a LOT of misunderstanding at your side.

Quote
Did you watch the video that I have linked from prof. Belcher and noticed that the direction of the induced current does not change?

So that is the root of your confusion. Here is another video of your "professor" doing real test showing just the opposite (normal) effect.

Description of the video

"As a permanent magnet is moved back and forth in the vacinity of a coil of conducting wire, a current is induced in the coil (as measured by the ammeter in the video)"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y5qejN9FpI

Quote
Of course, the total flux* penetrating the coil varies up and down and that induces voltage across an open coil in both direction.  There is nothing unusual about it according to Faraday's law.
Notice, that the video shows only an open coil being measured so you remark "shorted or not" is Ad Hoc.
* that also includes return flux.

Another facepalm..

Quote
Notice that as it is being swept across an naked magnet the first thing it encounters is the return flux.

Now you're repeating what i said in the first post.

Quote
Yes, that's the Faraday's law, but it has nothing to do with magnetic flux density dB/dt.

No comment..

Quote
Also, with small coil and large magnet you get two double voltage pulses because it:
1) starts encompassing the return flux.
2) stops encompassing the return flux.
3) starts encompassing the flux at the magnet's surface.
4) starts encompassing the flux at the magnet's surface.
First of all, it is impossible to measure the voltage across an ideal wire.
Also, an ideal short forms an ideal 1-turn loop/coil with the ideal wire.

More nonsense. Optimal magnet width is horizontal thickness of the one side of the coil and optimal magnet height is height of the coil's hole.

Quote
The direction of the induced current flowing in that loop/coil will be the same in cases 1 & 2 and the same but opposite in cases 3 & 4.  The direction of the current in cases 2 & 4 will be opposite.

Presumably you wanted to write 4) stops.. There is no "stops" phase, flux coil sees changes suddenly from N on approach to S in the middle and then N again. And you are wrong with those conclusions. I summed it nicely in the first post, again...

First small negative voltage from side N flux, then higher positive voltage as coil passed the center of the magnet and then another high negative voltage as coil crosses from strong central S flux to weak side N flux.

Quote
The magnitude and direction of the induced current will generate magnetic flux that will oppose any changes to the total flux encompassed by this shorted coil. In consequence the total flux encompassed by the coil will remain constant.
Notice that the direction of the current induced in a shorted coil DOES NOT follow the direction of the voltage induced in the same coil when it is open.  You do not appear to know that and that is why I wrote that you are conflating the behavior of an unloaded (or open) coils with loaded (or shorted coils).

It seems your confusion has roots in that animation, do yourself a favor and forget it, start with single wire in a magnetic field, then proceed to coils etc. Little by little you will understand.

Quote
Don't assume that this a new topic for me. I have been through it many times on this and other fora.

You're funny, i'll give you that. :)

Quote
Notice, that the Lenz's law is a qualitative law that specifies the direction of induced current, but states nothing about its magnitude.

Sure, cause it is an extension of Faradday's law which already specifies magnitude.

Quote
Also, sometimes it is said that the Lenz's law is manifested as the minus sign in the Faraday's law ε= - dΦ/dt.

Lose the "sometimes".

Quote
That minus sign refers to your voltage induced across an open coil by a changing flux. Note the concept of this voltage fails the Ohm's law in a shorted ideal coil and that is one of the many reasons why it is better to analyze coils in the current domain than voltage domain....and the capacitors - just the opposite.

Like i said, a funny guy. :)
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 05, 2020, 11:13:10 PM
But i'm thankful you reminded me of coil shorting 'cause i was about to post this old post from Stephan..

https://overunity.com/9720/fuelless-car-prototype-by-ismael-motor/

Hi All,
I got these supportive emails from Konehead ( Doug Konzen),
who is also working on overunity pulsemotors:

Douglas L. Konzen
an harti

hi Stefan

here is Ismael Aviso's electic car - it runs on "nothing at all" (it loops) and uses a battery only as buffer

plus the car runs on a standard forklift motor ...I dont know if you know about it yet - here is the peswiki article whch has condensed all the public information on it fairly good:

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Ismael_Aviso_Self-Charging_Electric_Car

he uses highvoltage resonating and "shorting" coils in the MEG and gets exponential power increase, maybe its similar to Tesla's electric car...but that antenna isnt really the way it works so much - the antenna is sort of a power-booster to it.

He did some tests of 600 reps of starting and stopping this car, and the battery doesnt go down and those forklift motors are amp-hogs.......its very amazing Ismaels MEG.....

Just tought I would give you heads-up on it...Ismael is good friend of mine we went to Sweden two summers ago to build electric car for SAAB but nothing happened they were going broke and what he does is very hard to believe to be true too...anyways you could put generator in place of car too, and have free energy home gensets easy enough.

Hopefully he will start producing some MEGs for public soon just thought I would let you know.

Basically how it works is he SHORTS coils at sinewave peaks, the coils collapse and rebound with huge voltage increase -then he shorts the peaks of the oscillations created and then you get the exponential power increase (nutshell description)...so instead of oscillations "fading out" the oscillations expand to huge increases in power - its non-reflective type of power increase too - rosens ramp the primary up in extra draw...

ciao Konehead (Doug Konzen)

Hi Stefan

you can post it on OU.com no problem

I know Ismael really well and he has told me how it works on telephone when he gives me his updates and progress...so
I know mabye 90% in general terms, and mabye 60% in "technical terms"

Ismael is a genius - he is microwave engineer and set up all the cell phone system in Saudi Arabia where he went to school.
He can write with his right hand , or his left hand, it doesnt matter so he is one of those guys with two brains going at once...

He uses some "inventions" of mine from my old konehead motors which I am proud of that he is using  - these are "pickup winds" which are simply secondary winds wrapped around, behind, and inside, of the primary winds. (his "core" is actual an inner secondary coil! plus more windings behind and around the "primary" to pickup all the normally-wasted ambient magnetic flux)

Also Ismael has the "repelling force" technology, which I have witnessed in Sweden of demos for  SAAB execs - this alone is really super amazing -  he can shoot a 1 kilo object in air (a coil) 30 ft in under a second and he dows it with a 9V battery and he can do it 16 times over and over and the battery will only drop around .3 V.....when I saw this, I wanted to throw all my stuff away....he has been doing the repelling force for awhile - he has some you tube videos showing it. Basically it is a coil vs coil
N agains N and pulse is super high frequency resonating pulse of 7500VDC discharge....dont know how he does it really but doesnt use invertor and is cascading DC and pickup winds "recycle" power back to where it came from plus he does coil-shorting in it too "somehow"

So think about  doing this repelling force with no moving parts - just slam a coil against another coil with that much force, and which  requires hardly any power to do - (it is all very much resonating power too, in the repelling force - iron just nearby will throw the resonance off!!)

He made some attempts at motors powered by it, but things kept flying apart from so much power - he started concentrating on the MEG last year, with no moving parts, and it has made the "mechanically rotating" repelling force obsolete sort ot....

other things he does is that he uses bifilar winds like that famous Tesla patent and he takes out all the hundreds/thousands of harmonics produced from them - he says that most people dont realize what bifilars do - because the increased power is usually cancelled out but Ismale gathers it all up somehow....actually he went to "septfilar" winds lately - 6 wires instead of just two, and now he got much more power that way.

He told me if you realy understand the HUBBARD coils, that is sort of what he is doing in his MEG.

Ther real heart of system, is the "shorting of the coils" at their sinewave peaks - this is also one of my inventions/discoveries I did a few years ago - you can amplify the voltage in a regular generator coil around 20times more voltage doing this - it is REALLY SIMPLE - just use a switch  (must be very low resistance like high-amperage mosfet or a few mosfets in paralell) and simply "touch" the coil leads together with this switch for say 2ms or so - and put FWBR AC legs across the coil and ZING  - a cap on the DC side of bridge goes up in voltage X 20 just like that...."amps" remain the same.....the coil collapses, and "rebounds" with a vengeance is how I describe how it works...

Ismael took this a few steps further - and he shorts the coils 5 times during sinewave peak period - it is very interesting looking at scope at a shorted coil - it is like a Tesla spark gap as it creates oscillations/ringing and what Ismael does is short the PEAKS OF THE OSCILLATIONS CREATED with very quick and accurate switching....this is heart of his MEG system as far as I understand it, and where he gets all his power from the "ambient" you could say....so he gets X100 increase in power doing this from his initial primary-feed....

the gain is in VOLTAGE - and you cant put any resistance on the cap as itr fills - and also like mentioned the switching must be very low resistance....Ismale uses some IGBTs  in the MEG - it is high voltage, high frequency....

it must have a "2-stage output" circuit, where the cap fills from shorting, then cap hits load while cap is disconnected from "source"...pretty simple also....

I will answer your quesitons below:

>
> Could I post this in my overunity.com forum ?
DK:
sure no problem

> Or could you post it ?
DK:
you can  do it...

DK:

Have you tested it yourself ?
I helped Ismael do demos of his repelling-force power in Sweden two summers ago, so have witnessed it and have general knowledge how it works (the replling force tech) and it is very real and very amazing jsut that...

As for the MEG, I havent built one - it is way too complicated it needs special microproccesors for IBGT filtering and EMP cancellations in order to do the very fast frequencies the MEG works on - he hired team of top notch computer chip guys to do his special microproccesors - but I have tested the "shorting-the-coils tech" alot, and I know how good that works plus know that pikcup winds around primaries gathers all the "ambient" flux that is normally wasted....so those two things, and also backemf/recoil collection circuits too I know and have tested all that but I cant do the 7500VDC cap discharge in his repelling force tech (I assume alot this is his "primary" in his MEG too)
and I cant do the resonating-high frequency pulse to his repeliing force tech either.

that anntenae on his car I dont really think does all that much - it will do somethign, but the real power is in the resonance, the shorting coils exponenetila-power increase via 5 times at peak coil-shorting, the pickup winds, and all the HUBBARD coil-like tech in his MEG.

>
> Are you convinced that it works this way ?
DK:
yes - I've seen the repelling force, and have been following his MEG progress for the past year and it works just like described - in fact better than you think, since it is so amazing, nobody believes it! I asked him what is the "ratio" of power increase, if you have like 100W system, and you put the MEG "onto" it, just so I could tell people, and he said it is 1000 times more power - and I said come on Ismael you have to tell something to people they will believe!! So just for fun I say it is 100times increase in power - but it is really way more than that....the doing the math on his older repelling force tech - it comes to about 1200HP blasts  from a 9V battery 16 times....which is ridiculous nobody believes it...Hector thought there was rocket fuel in the videos and it was fake!

> The videos are pretty amazing...
DK:
Yes - the battery is a BUFFER actually in way to connect high voltage power to lower voltage -
he uses no invertor but something else is going on  - so the battery is-not the "power source" but you got to give something people understand so the battery is in there...you can imagine how much power it takes to run a forklift motor - and battery goes up while he is running it....
they did 600reps  of starting car form stop battery stayed at 13V
His MEG when it puts out power has already gathered-up all the backemf and plasma then will destroy brushes  in the switching - so he runs that forklift motor on very high voltage and very low amps which is also amazing thing too....he has  recent video of this - looking at the brushes in his forklift motor and there si no plasma at all >

> So how does he extract the power from the shorted coils ?
DK:
Like described above - at least that is how I do it - he does something very similar but needs very low resistance switch, and no resistance in the caps and must have a two-stage circuit...his MEG is very complicated to me cant really say exacty what he does in extraction of the coil-shorting he does at high voltage and high frequencies but it works I can talk about this stuff forever he has told me lots about it.

> Does he use some kind of transformer hooked up to it ?
DK:
No - no invertor and doesnt step-down the voltage to the motor either - it is very "clean" power hitting the forklift motor as described.

> So does this violate Lentz law ?
DK:
Yes in that the extra-power gained in the "coil shorting" 5 times at sinewave peak is "non-reflective" to the primary.
I use the coil-shorting tech in my latest Muller-type generators, and with two stage output and "AC series cap" in circuit (like Tesla does with his "resonator caps" in his spark gap stuff) I can get power output form my aircored generator coils, (induced by neodymium magnets in rotor like Muller) to be "non-reflective" to the motor input.....which is "lenz-buster"

Ismael told me that the 5 times at peaks coil shorting does not affect the primary to any extra draw too, and he uses the "AC series caps too, which worked like "high bypass filters" really, in that the 'lug" is blocked" but the high end stuff goes through and fills caps up with no-reflection...I could go into more details on this but this is good enough for now....

> BTW, what happened to your own pulse motors ?

DK:
I started doing Muller motors with very strong neodymiums, and  started doing lots of AC rotovertors...best thing that happened with the old konehead pulse motors, is that Ismael took it and expanded it into what he has now...Ismael was one of the first people to replicate one of my konehad motors long ago and got it to work great (overunity) - then he incorporated the shorting coils into them too - ( I just did this with generator coils in Muller generators)  then he got the repelling force tech going (with pickup winds which were from konehee motors) and then went onto the MEG>
> Any progress ?
DK:
Doing some good motor-generators right now seem to be 8 times overunity sold a unit to someone in florida but my stuff is like toys compared to Ismaels tech....>

> Many thanks again and keep up the great work.

DK:

you too overunity.com is great thing going on!
I am going to replicate Anton HHO tech soon - my friend has reactors, I modified motor already...

Here is cirucit I use for coil-shorting....what Ismael does is "somewhat" similar to it...note the AC cap in series off the FWBR...this is what make it "non reflective" to motor draw:

http://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/upright-alternator-circuits

Here is my site-lots of rotovertors and muller-type generators on their axles

http://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/

Robert Myrland in Norway has some LOOPING "rotovertor-Mullers" he uses hiperco cores with needle-point design - he is doing some small scale produciton right now like 2 or 3 a month - i might help him make some in may....

Here is the thing I made this summer for cusotomero - an "uperight motor-generator" that uses coil shorting in the generator coils - runs on 5W and puts out about 40W (that is nothing compared to Ismaels stuff!)

http://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/upright-alternator

ciao!
Konehead
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 06, 2020, 01:29:46 AM
And sky is blue...
Facepalm..
Another facepalm..
And another..
Again you cling to semantics
We got a genius here! :)
You have no idea what you're saying, do you.
Already addressed that nonsense.
Another facepalm..
No comment..
More nonsense.
You're funny, i'll give you that. :)
Like i said, a funny guy. :)
This does not constitute a scientific discussion.

Once again current will bi in phase with voltage for all normal conditions and therefore is irrelevant in the context. Unless we are talking very high inductance and/or frequency, extreme cases.
I was talking about ideal coils to keep the discussion focused. Real coils have resistance, which make their analysis more complicated and their behavior somewhere between the ideal shorted coil and open coil.

You are conflating by replying about current when my post was about voltage.
That's my point.  I am pointing out that your analysis of inductors in the voltage domain does not yield valid results. if it did, the induced current in a shorted ideal coil subjected to any changing flux would become infinite and the direction of the induced current would always follow the direction of the induced voltage...but it doesn't.

It does, except if we are talking backEMF in DC motor that only lowers the input current and thus self regulates motor speed. In other words, current never flows in direction of that backEMF, it only reduces input voltage and current.
The direction of the induced current in a shorted coil also does not follow the direction of the induced voltage in the same coil which is open.  It does not have to be a part of a DC motor. This applies to any shorted ideal coil that is subjected to varying external flux.

dB/dT is perfectly valid expression of Farraday's law.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-derive-the-Maxwell-Faraday-equation-from-Faradays-law (https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-derive-the-Maxwell-Faraday-equation-from-Faradays-law)
Not as the standalone dB/dt expression.

The contour integral converts the rate of change of magnetic flux density dB/dt into the rate of change of flux dΦ/dt.
The same goes for the inverse of the curl operator in the differential form.

I did not assume anything. The root of your confusion is in your "professor's" animation.
Are you claiming that this animation is incorrect for an ideal shorted coil ?

I gave you one example where induced voltage does not produce current in same direction, but this is an exception to the rule.
One exception is enough to invalidate the entire claim as a universal proposition.

Impossible you say.. Have you ever seen a distribution of voltage across a loop of wire.
Not across an ideal wire.  Only across a long resistor such as a copper wire.

Did it not cross your mind that opposite sides of the loop will have 1/2 of induced voltage between them. Never crossed your mind did it.
I thought that when I was 13 years old.
A loop does not have an end so it cannot have opposite sides by definition.
An ideal coil does not have a resistance which would allow for a voltage drop to be measured.

Again you cling to semantics trying to sound smart but you turn out just the opposite. Here, learn something, quoting from the thread i posted here the other day...
Semantics are important. It allows for precise communication. Using bad terminology only confuses the conversation and makes the speaker look careless and ignorant.

Force = Mass * acceleration
Work = Change in Energy
Work = force * distance moved unit: newton meter or joule or Work = Mass * Gravity * Height
Power = work / time = force * displacement / time = force * velocity
Power (hp,watt) = work(ENERGY)/time aka time rate of energy transfer
Energy = Power x Time
Your equation for power is correct but you still used it interchangeably with energy in your statement.

Reactive power consumes energy through copper losses P = I²R. Eh
You were discussing inductive reactance (an imaginary component of impedance) and copper losses are caused by the resistance (the real component of impedance).
It would be more correct to write that reactive current converts electric energy into heat energy in resistive circuits.  But not in ideal systems.

This is where being imprecise with semantics leads you to apply phenomena from gray-area systems which mix the imaginary and real components of impedance, to purely reactive systems.

We are not talking superconductors here,
But I am.
Everytime I used the phrase "ideal coil" I really meant it.
Ideal coils do not exhibit any resistance. Of course coils can be made or mixed with resistive materials but then they are not ideal anymore and when we discuss theory we must define the behavior of the ideal systems first before we introduce imperfections into them....such as resistance.

voltage will be distributed evenly across the coil and opposite sides will have 1/2 of the induced voltage between them.
This cannot be true because an ideal shorted coil does not have "opposite sides" and it does not have resistance which can exhibit a voltage drop, which can then be measured.

So that is the root of your confusion. Here is another video of your "professor" doing real test showing just the opposite (normal) effect.
Description of the video
"As a permanent magnet is moved back and forth in the vacinity of a coil of conducting wire, a current is induced in the coil (as measured by the ammeter in the video)"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y5qejN9FpI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y5qejN9FpI)
That video correctly shows the current decaying in the resistance of the coil...but that coil is not ideal.  Its resistance constantly converts the induced current into heat, dissipating it.
That is the behavior of resistance not an ideal shorted coil.
The previous video, which I have posted shows an ideal shorted coil without its "contamination" by resistive phenomena.

More nonsense. Optimal magnet width is horizontal thickness of the one side of the coil and optimal magnet height is height of the coil's hole.
I was not discussion optimal coil dimensions. I merely wrote that a coil which is much smaller than a magnet will first encompass the return flux and next it will encompass the surface flux.  The two stages can be further subdivided into the increase and then decrease of that flux penetrating the coil.  That makes 4 substages with 4 different rates of change of flux through the coil.

Presumably you wanted to write 4) stops..
Maybe you read it before I did my proofreading and correcting after copy/pasting these lines.

There is no "stops" phase, flux coil sees changes suddenly from N on approach to S in the middle and then N again.
Sudden changes in magnetic flux direction are very unlikely.  I claim that these changes in encompassed flux are gradual and they pass through zero as the coil is moved like on your video at 5:20 (https://youtu.be/KmENeg5YSCw?t=319).

And you are wrong with those conclusions. I summed it nicely in the first post, again...
Prove me wrong

First small negative voltage from side N flux, then higher positive voltage as coil passed the center of the magnet and then another high negative voltage as coil crosses from strong central S flux to weak side N flux.
The animation below shows the flux that is encompassed by a small open coil (red, edge on view) as it moves from left to right.

https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)

First it enters the magnet's return flux (the flux is pointing down). This return flux encompassed by the coil first increases and then increases. Eventually the coil will enter a space where the return and surface flux are equal, so the net flux encompassed by this coil will become zero. After that more and more surface flux (pointing up this time) will be encompassed by the coil and it will eventually will reach a maximum. After that, the surface flux penetrating the coil's surface will decrease until it the collective flux reaches zero as more and more return flux attempts to penetrate the coil in the opposite direction.

The voltage induced in the open coil will be proportional to the rate of change of the flux penetrating the coil.
The current induced in a shorted ideal coil will be proportional to the flux attempting to penetrate the coil, but the net flux will remain constant.  Because the return flux and surface flux have opposite directions the induced current will also have opposite directions in these regions.
Also, the magnitude of the current induced in an ideal shorted coil WILL NOT depend on the speed of the coil's motion ...but the voltage induced in an open coil - will depend in the speed.  That's more disparity between the induced voltage and current for you.

It seems your confusion has roots in that animation, do yourself a favor and forget it,
I am not confused. That animation is correct.
It is you who is confused by the mixture of inductive and resistive phenomena

start with single wire in a magnetic field, then proceed to coils etc. Little by little you will understand.
...and my advice to you is to start analyzing purely inductive phenomena and then little by little you will understand them correctly.
After you do, you can start introducing the resistive phenomena and the association between them which is expressed by the RL time constant.

Sure, cause it is an extension of Faradday's law which already specifies magnitude.
The Lenz law is a qualitative law that does not specify the magnitude of the induced current.
The Faraday's law is a quantitative law but it does not specify the magnitude of the induced current in shorted ideal coils. It specifies only the induced voltage (ε= - dΦ/dt) across open coils and incompletely shorted coils (i.e. resistive coils).

There sure is a LOT of misunderstanding at your side.
Please enumerate my misunderstandings of physics in a scientific manner, without using derision and Ad Hominem remarks.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 06, 2020, 02:07:36 PM
This does not constitute a scientific discussion.

When someone writes nonsense there is nothing else to say.

Quote
I was talking about ideal coils to keep the discussion focused. Real coils have resistance, which make their analysis more complicated and their behavior somewhere between the ideal shorted coil and open coil.

Talking about ideal coils does not "keep discussion focused", we are talking real coils.

The only difference in ideal coil, that is, ideal inductor is that current will lag voltage by 90°.

This does not mean current will be DC.

I talked about delayed lenz and Hanes in another thread but again this does not mean current is DC, it's AC, just delayed.

Quote
That's my point.  I am pointing out that your analysis of inductors in the voltage domain does not yield valid results. if it did, the induced current in a shorted ideal coil subjected to any changing flux would become infinite and the direction of the induced current would always follow the direction of the induced voltage...but it doesn't.

You are wrong. Like i said, your confusion is rooted in that misleading animation. Again, the only difference in ideal inductor is that voltage will lead by 90° degrees just like current will for purely capacitive circuit.

Quote
The direction of the induced current in a shorted coil also does not follow the direction of the induced voltage in the same coil which is open.  It does not have to be a part of a DC motor. This applies to any shorted ideal coil that is subjected to varying external flux.

Again, wrong.

Quote

Not as the standalone dB/dt expression.

The contour integral converts the rate of change of magnetic flux density dB/dt into the rate of change of flux dΦ/dt. The same goes for the inverse of the curl operator in the differential form.

Φ is integral of B over an area but dB/dT is commonly used as Faraday's law.

Two ways Faraday's law is used.

A) Induction by flux cutting the induced wire: this induction is done in current generators and the flux lines must cut the wire. It requires relative movement (at speed v) between the field and the wire

E = B · v · Length

B)Induction by flux linking two coils: this induction is done in transformers. The flux lines do not need to cut the wire. It is just need a variable magnetic field

E = -N · S · dB/dt

More > https://overunity.com/14711/is-faradays-induction-law-correct/

Quote
Are you claiming that this animation is incorrect for an ideal shorted coil ?

I'm saying it's irrelevant for the present discussion.

Quote
One exception is enough to invalidate the entire claim as a universal proposition.

That is even not an exception cause there is already a greater voltage in the wire which does not allow backEMF to produce it's own current. This does not show that current in a coil does not follow direction of voltage.

Quote
Not across an ideal wire.  Only across a long resistor such as a copper wire.

We are talking real not ideal.

Quote
I thought that when I was 13 years old.

Then you were smarter back then.

Quote
A loop does not have an end so it cannot have opposite sides by definition.

Yes it does, any point has an opposite point.

Quote
An ideal coil does not have a resistance which would allow for a voltage drop to be measured.

Again, we are not talking superconductors.

Quote
Semantics are important. It allows for precise communication. Using bad terminology only confuses the conversation and makes the speaker look careless and ignorant.

Very ironic from someone making so many mistakes who makes himself look exactly that, careless and ignorant.

What i said is not bad terminology...

Quote
Your equation for power is correct but you still used it interchangeably with energy in your statement.

..it is actually perfectly correct, "more power" means more energy per unit of time, which is exactly what is being conveyed. That expression is used all over the engineering world.

Quote
You were discussing inductive reactance (an imaginary component of impedance) and copper losses are caused by the resistance (the real component of impedance).
It would be more correct to write that reactive current converts electric energy into heat energy in resistive circuits.  But not in ideal systems.

You were trying to imply i don't know the difference between reactive and real power, when i actually understand it better than you do.

You made the mistake cause in your rush to find a mistake in what i said you assumed i mixed reactive and real power while actually all i meant was that reactive power consumes copper losses.

You are obsessed with ideal inductor but have not even mentioned the key point, 90° phase shift of voltage and current, i had to do it for you.

Quote
This is where being imprecise with semantics leads you to apply phenomena from gray-area systems which mix the imaginary and real components of impedance, to purely reactive systems.

It's not being imprecise, it's only that you misinterpret things or use extreme cases like superconductors.

Quote
But I am.
Everytime I used the phrase "ideal coil" I really meant it.
Ideal coils do not exhibit any resistance. Of course coils can be made or mixed with resistive materials but then they are not ideal anymore and when we discuss theory we must define the behavior of the ideal systems first before we introduce imperfections into them....such as resistance.

Again, this is not a thread about superconductors, if you want to discuss them open a thread of your own.

Quote
This cannot be true because an ideal shorted coil does not have "opposite sides" and it does not have resistance which can exhibit a voltage drop, which can then be measured.

Every point on a normal coil has it's opposite point and pressure between the two is 1/2 the overall pressure/voltage. Again the superconductors..eh.

Quote
That video correctly shows the current decaying in the resistance of the coil...but that coil is not ideal.  Its resistance constantly converts the induced current into heat, dissipating it.
That is the behavior of resistance not an ideal shorted coil.
The previous video, which I have posted shows an ideal shorted coil without its "contamination" by resistive phenomena.

Again, we are not talking ideal coils.

Quote
I was not discussion optimal coil dimensions. I merely wrote that a coil which is much smaller than a magnet will first encompass the return flux and next it will encompass the surface flux.  The two stages can be further subdivided into the increase and then decrease of that flux penetrating the coil.  That makes 4 substages with 4 different rates of change of flux through the coil.

I summed up clearly what happens in my first post.

Quote
Sudden changes in magnetic flux direction are very unlikely.  I claim that these changes in encompassed flux are gradual and they pass through zero as the coil is moved like on your video at 5:20 (https://youtu.be/KmENeg5YSCw?t=319).

Change of direction of flux is sudden, see the beginning of the video.

Quote
Prove me wrong

Oscilloscope in the video proves you wrong. There are no "stops", as voltage from side flux ends immediately the voltage from main central flux begins.

Quote
The animation below shows the flux that is encompassed by a small open coil (red, edge on view) as it moves from left to right.

https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)

First it enters the magnet's return flux (the flux is pointing down). This return flux encompassed by the coil first increases and then increases. Eventually the coil will enter a space where the return and surface flux are equal, so the net flux encompassed by this coil will become zero. After that more and more surface flux (pointing up this time) will be encompassed by the coil and it will eventually will reach a maximum. After that, the surface flux penetrating the coil's surface will decrease until it the collective flux reaches zero as more and more return flux attempts to penetrate the coil in the opposite direction.

You just repeated what i said in unnecessarily complicated manner altho what happens is very simple and clear. Oscilloscope shows exactly what happens. No need to repeat it.

Quote
The voltage induced in the open coil will be proportional to the rate of change of the flux penetrating the coil.

Duh

Quote
The current induced in a shorted ideal coil will be proportional to the flux attempting to penetrate the coil, but the net flux will remain constant.  Because the return flux and surface flux have opposite directions the induced current will also have opposite directions in these regions.
Also, the magnitude of the current induced in an ideal shorted coil WILL NOT depend on the speed of the coil's motion ...but the voltage induced in an open coil - will depend in the speed.  That's more disparity between the induced voltage and current for you.

Have you ever performed tests on superconducting coil? You haven't have you. So do not pollute this thread with your mislead "theories".

Quote
I am not confused. That animation is correct.
It is you who is confused by the mixture of inductive and resistive phenomena

You can't tell if animation is correct cause you never seen a superconducting coil, let alone performed tests on it.

It's you who is confused about inductive and resistive phenomena in general and in combination.

Quote
...and my advice to you is to start analyzing purely inductive phenomena and then little by little you will understand them correctly.
After you do, you can start introducing the resistive phenomena and the association between them which is expressed by the RL time constant.

Ironically, i understand them better than you do. You didn't even know about voltage leading current by 90° in ideal inductor, the key point. Talking about ideal inductor without mentioning this is ridiculous.

Like i said, start with single wire in a magnetic field, see how Lorentz force, that is, Laplace force acts on it, then proceed to coils, see how voltage is induced in various configurations, learn about voltage-current phase shift in reactive circuits, then you can proceed to LC(R) tanks, in series and parallel, band pass and band stop filters etc. Here are few basic formulas to get you started..

XL= 2πfL
XC= -1/2πfC
Z = sqrt(R² + (Xc - Xl)²)
F = 1/6.28(LC)
F = 1/2π√LC
τ = L/R inductor time constant, after ~5τ (transient time) current reaches 99.5%
τ = RC for RC circuit, after 5RC cap is 99.5% charged
energy stored in an inductor E = LI²/2
energy stored in an cap E = 1/2 QV and E = CV²/2
true power P=VIcosφ

Quote
The Lenz law is a qualitative law that does not specify the magnitude of the induced current.
The Faraday's law is a quantitative law but it does not specify the magnitude of the induced current in shorted ideal coils. It specifies only the induced voltage (ε= - dΦ/dt) across open coils and incompletely shorted coils (i.e. resistive coils).

And sky is blue.

Quote
Please enumerate my misunderstandings of physics in a scientific manner, without using derision and Ad Hominem remarks.

I just did.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 06, 2020, 02:39:54 PM
Just to add, you don't need a superconductor to have near perfect inductor, transformer can be plugged into wall 24/7 yet it uses very little real power cause voltage and current are almost 90° out of phase.

When you put load on the secondary, to the primary it's core starts to look more lossy and voltage and current come more into phase, bigger load you connect.

Does this mean current in the primary does not follow voltage, it doesn't, it follows it perfectly, just with a delay.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 06, 2020, 06:52:37 PM
Voltage always comes first
Verpies taught this many times over last decade

There are pages of similar discussions where members argued
Against Verpies about this here and elsewhere!

However I do believe he also mentioned another
Exception or stipulation?

——///—-///—-//////——//—

I propose a solution here !

A gentleman’s contest!!

A steel cage match ...two men enter
One man leaves!!

However IMO everyone wins

Stefan has a steel cage match venue somewhere ?(I always had to clean it up and roll
It back into storage room !

He may have sold it for scrap ?
Will look ?

Anyhoo
An impartial judge ? Maybe like that Dave guy from EeForum?
Or?” Suggestions “?

And one stipulation from my view ...would be real time
Not overnight “mail in ““copypasteathon”

Could sell tickets for charity?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 07, 2020, 04:51:10 PM
I have no doubt Verpies is knowledgeable and good man. Aside the ego flaming, i think the biggest issue is he focused too much on that animation and ideal coil instead of real ones.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 07, 2020, 06:43:04 PM
Well
I have corresponded with Verpies
And he will absolutely engage in teal time
Discussion

However with one addendum

That there be technical panel to oversee efforts ( unbiased to anything
But standard EE or physics ( actually hard to write physics since I know
Verpies has issues at some levels with “ physics “and perhaps both fields?

However IMO the goal should be to debate a claim of some heretofore overlooked
Or misinterpreted /miss understood “anonomolous behavior”

And for clarity Verpies is an open source builder
IMO the goal here should be empirical evidence which manifests
In a build to prove same claim

With 100% transparent scrutiny!!( no restrictions)
Scientific method of brutal honesty and integrity!!

Judges will be sought if agreed

However a 100% scientific experiment would be simpler?
Verpies has very limited time !
Keeps very busy in his life as well his service to open source community.
Short and simple would be best!

Respectfully

Chet K
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 07, 2020, 08:39:39 PM
When someone writes nonsense there is nothing else to say.
That is just an empty assertion without supporting arguments. It appears nonsense to you because you not understand my arguments.
Anyway, it does not justify your unscientific remarks.

Talking about ideal coils does not "keep discussion focused"
Yes it does, because it decomposes a complex phenomenon into its basics constituent phenomena.
In this discussion the inductive phenomenon is one phenomenon and the resistive on is another.  You conflate them and analyze them collectively and them just call them "coil",
Talking about basic constituents of a phenomenon in separation is simpler that talking about them collectively.

That is why chemistry breaks down matter to its more basic components and interactions.
An automotive mechanic does not diagnose/repair the entire car but its individual components.
An electronic engineer does not design the entire circuit but builds it up from individual components.
By the same token, a physicist decomposes complex phenomena into a complex arrangement of simple phenomena, so the constituents are easier to understand and calculate.

If I was to argue with you about all the phenomena* occurring in a "real coil" collectively, then the discussion would become so complex that it would quickly lose focus.
- resistance of a real coil.
- inter-turn capacitance of a real coil
- the displacement current through the above inter-turn capacitance
- the magnetic flux generated by the capacitance above.
- near fields generated by of a real coil
- far fields generated by a real coil
- radiation resistance of a real coil
- change of coil's geometry in inductance due to the Laplace force
- the skin effect in the winding of a real coil
- the proximity effect in the winding of a real coil
- the circumferential vs. axial current of real solenoidal coils.
- the myriad of ferromagnetic, ferrimagnetic and nuclear effects occurring in a real coil with a core, that I will not list here now.

Thus, I am not apologizing for simplifying things and talking about the constituent phenomena depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) that started this discussion, separately.

I will continue to decompose the phenomena manifested in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) which you linked in your 1st post, into their constituent phenomena, which are.
1) The pure inductance of an ideal coil
2) The resistance of the real coil
3) The magnetic flux generated by that large permanent magnet (especially its geometry).

P.S.
I don't think it is necessary to get into the BH curve of the permanent magnet (external flux source) in order to analyze the induction phenomenon occurring in a coil that is swept across this magnet's pole.
IMO we can disregard the real ferromagnetic phenomena occurring in the magnet and just treat it as an ideal magnetic flux source for the sake of keeping this discussion focused.
If you disagree to that simplification, then object.

The only difference in ideal coil, that is, ideal inductor is that current will lag voltage by 90°.
Are you referring to the induced voltage depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) from your 1st post, or to some other current and voltage from another experiment?

Anyway, I claim that the current can lag applied voltage also in non-ideal inductors (i.e. in inductors accompanied by discrete or distributed resistances, which form a basic RL circuit such as this one (https://circuitdigest.com/sites/default/files/inlineimages/u/RL-Circuit.png)).
Because of that, I cannot agree with your statement above, especially with the word "only".

This does not mean current will be DC.
I talked about delayed lenz and Hanes in another thread but again this does not mean current is DC, it's AC, just delayed.
Let's enumerate situations when the induced current is unipolar and when it is bipolar. Your statement above claims that it is always bipolar.

I claim that the induced current in an ideal shorted coil being swept across the pole of a permanent magnet (see the motion that I am referring to here (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)), will be:
1) unipolar when that coil enters only a region where the surface-flux at the pole dominates.
2) unipolar when that coil enters only a region where the return-flux at the pole dominates.
3) bipolar when that coil enters both regions enumerated above.

Additionally, I claim that the induced voltage across an open coil being swept across the pole of a permanent magnet (see the motion that I am referring to here (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)), will be:
4) Always bipolar, regardless whether the coil enters a region where the return flux dominates or not.

Finally, I claim that the induced current in closed RL circuit (such as a resistive coil) being swept across the pole of a permanent magnet (see the motion that I am referring to here (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)), will:
5) approach unipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is large compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the surface-flux at the pole dominates.
6) bipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is small or equal compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the surface-flux at the pole dominates.
7) approach unipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is large compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the return-flux dominates.
8 ) bipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is small or equal compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the return-flux dominates.
9) bipolar when that coil enters both the return-flux AND the surface-flux at the pole regardless of the L/R constant of that RL circuit.

Do you agree with all of the statements above. If "no" then please write me the numbers of the ones you disagree with.

You are wrong. Like i said, your confusion is rooted in that misleading animation.
I claim that this animation (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) from prof. Belcher is correct for a shorted ideal coil and that it supports my claims.
What are your reasons for stating that this animation is wrong ?

Φ is integral of B over an area but dB/dT is commonly used as Faraday's law.
...
Two ways Faraday's law is used...
And I can invent many more expressions which reduce to magnetic flux, such as:

md^2/it^2 = Φ
RQ = Φ
vt = Φ
Li = Φ
Bd^2 = Φ
e/i = Φ
fd/i = Φ

where:
m = mass
d = distance
i = electric current
t = time
R = electric resistance
Q = charge
v = electric potential (voltage)
L = inductance
B = magnetic flux density
e = energy
f = force

I can put any of these relationships inside the Farady's law and then use them to derive the fundamental relationship between rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) and the induced voltage.
But as long as they reduce to the rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) in the end, means that Faraday's this law depends fundamentally on roc of flux and not on roc of flux density, or any of the other intermediate unreduced expressions listed above.

Practically, this means that according to this law, a voltage induced across an open coil is dependent only only on the rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) through that coil and not on the distribution of the flux density (B) inside that coil.

I will also go even further and add, that the magnitude of the current induced in an ideal shorted coil subjected to varying external flux, DOES NOT depend on the rate of change of flux dΦ/dt.
I claim that it only depends on the difference between the staring and ending magnitude of the external flux or ΔΦ.

Yes, I claim that in this scenario it does not matter how quickly the external flux changes and that the magnitude of the induced current (and magnitude of energy associated with this current) will be the same regardless of the speed of the motion between the coil and magnet.

Quote from: verpies
Are you claiming that this animation is incorrect for an ideal shorted coil ?
I'm saying it's irrelevant for the present discussion.
That's dodging a question - not answering it.

The present discussion is concerned with the voltage and current induced in a coil as it is subjected to varying external flux from a permanent magnet.
The animation (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) depicts that.

Again, we are not talking superconductors.
...
You are obsessed with ideal inductor
...
We are talking real not ideal.
You cannot escape the consideration of idealized components because the scientific manner of performing a detailed analysis of a complex system is to decompose its complex behavior into a complex arrangement of simple behaviors.
I will discuss with you the resistive component of a real coil once we come to a consensus about the behavior of the purely inductive coil.

Yes it does, any point has an opposite point.
That geometrical opposition with respect to to a 3rd point - not an opposite point in an electric circuit such as a shorted ideal coil which does not even have a reference point.

more power" means more energy per unit of time,
I agree with that. Formally power it is the rate of change of energy. That "change" can refer the transfer of energy or to its conversion (e.g. into heat).

..it is actually perfectly correct,
Not in this context because you wrote that:
...power is consumed
And when the definition of power is substituted into that statement then you get a nonsensical one statement like:
"rate of change of energy is consumed"

What i said is not bad terminology...
That expression is used all over the engineering world.
Yes it is bad. You used a colloquialism which conflated power and energy....and then you tried to excuse it with Argumentum ad Numerum.

Very ironic from someone making so many mistakes who makes himself look exactly that, careless and ignorant.
So be precise with your terminology and don't conflate power and energy in your statements anymore, even of most of the lay people do it routinely.

You were trying to imply i don't know the difference between reactive and real power, when i actually understand it better than you do.
No, I was pointing out that the energy of imaginary (reactive) current is dissipated (converted to heat) by the real component of impedance (resistance).

...power is consumed by inductive reactance.
Even if I correct your first mistake by substituting "energy" for "power" and write:
"...energy is consumed by inductive reactance".

That statement is still wrong because Inductive Reactance is the imaginary component of impedance and as such it cannot "consume" the energy associated with the reactive current.
To consume/dissipate that energy as heat a real resistance is required.
Only then the equation for the dissipated power Pdissipated=Ri^2 applies.
The same equation with the inductive reactance (XL) substituted for the real resistance (R) is false, in mathspeak: Pdissipated<>Xi^2.

...all i meant was that reactive power consumes copper losses.
You are using imprecise terminology again.
First of all the phrase "power consumes" is wrong, because power cannot consume anything.
Also, in this context to "consume" means to "dissipate as heat" or to "convert to heat" since energy cannot be destroyed.
The phenomenon responsible for the conversion of electric energy in this case is the resistance of the copper (the real component of impedance) according to Pdissipated=Ri^2.
So your statement should be corrected as follows:
"...all I meant was that the resistance of the copper dissipates/consumes/converts the energy associated with the reactive current".

you have not even mentioned the key point, 90° phase shift of voltage and current, i had to do it for you.
I did not mention a whole lot of things, which I know, but what of it?
Also, why do you think that the 90° phase shift of voltage and current is a key point in the experiment depicted in that video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) in your original post, that deserved to be mentioned ?

Again, we are not talking ideal coils.
...
Again, this is not a thread about superconductors, if you want to discuss them open a thread of your own.
...
Every point on a normal coil has it's opposite point and pressure between the two is 1/2 the overall pressure/voltage. Again the superconductors..eh.
...
It's not being imprecise, it's only that you misinterpret things or use extreme cases like superconductors.
You are reacting to it as if I was changing the subject but the decomposition of complex phenomena into a complex arrangement of simple phenomena is a basic tool of science.
I am not opposed to adding the behavior and properties of resistance to ideal coils to later obtain the behavior and properties of real coils. But first we need to discuss these phenomena individually, because if we don't agree about the basic phenomena, how can we agree about their combination ?

Change of direction of flux is sudden, see the beginning of the video.
"Sudden" is a very relative concept.  All I claim is that the function of flux's direction vs. position is continuous and passes through zero.

Oscilloscope in the video proves you wrong. There are no "stops", as voltage from side flux ends immediately the voltage from main central flux begins.
...
Oscilloscope shows exactly what happens. No need to repeat it.
No, they don't prove me wrong. The picture displayed by the scope simply does not show everything as it depends on the setting of its time base.
Noting happens "immediately" and the direction of the flux, which is integrated by the coil's contour. Flux cannot reverse instantaneously nor without crossing the zero magnitude.

You just repeated what i said in unnecessarily complicated manner altho what happens is very simple and clear.
Simple? I think Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger need you for their studies.

Have you ever performed tests on superconducting coil?
Yes

So do not pollute this thread with your mislead "theories".
Would you like to be left alone in blissful ignorance ?

It's you who is confused about inductive and resistive phenomena in general and in combination.
Since you acknowledge at all, that there is a "combination" of phenomena at play in the experiment performed in the video linked in your original post, so why do thou protest so much at my attempts to discuss these component phenomena individually with you?

Ironically, i understand them better than you do.
The jury is still out, but they are watching...

learn about voltage-current phase shift in reactive circuits
Talking about ideal inductor without mentioning this is ridiculous.
...
You didn't even know about voltage leading current by 90° in ideal inductor, the key point.
Do you mean the voltage induced in that experiment referred to in your original post, where a coil is swept in front of a magnet's pole and of which you have posted this scopeshot (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/dlattach/attach/178960/) ?

Also, asserting the knowledge of my knowledge is a pretty arrogant statement without telepathy. You would not write that if you read my other posts on this forum on the subject.

Like i said, start with single wire in a magnetic field, see how Lorentz force, that is, Laplace force acts on it,
I agree with the existence Laplace force but the force exerted on a current carrying wire (such as a coil) when immersed in magnetic flux is a new subject.
I though we ware limiting our conversation only to the induced voltage and current in coils.

I don't think we need to discus this because we both agree about the existence, magnitude and direction of the force exerted on a current carrying wire

And sky is blue.
Only half of the time ...at most
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 12:35:46 AM
LOL i take back what i said in last post.

That is just an empty assertion without supporting arguments. It appears nonsense to you because you not understand my arguments.

It's just an objective statement. I don't understand your arguments? Funny..

You had no arguments so far.

Quote
Anyway, it does not justify your unscientific remarks.....

Oh the irony.

Quote
Yes it does, because it decomposes a complex phenomenon into its basics constituent phenomena.
In this discussion the inductive phenomenon is one phenomenon and the resistive on is another.  You conflate them and analyze them collectively and them just call them "coil",
Talking about basic constituents of a phenomenon in separation is simpler that talking about them collectively.

All your rant comes down to ascribing some mystical properties to pure inductor, which you yourself can't define nor explain, meanwhile you "forgot" ordinary transformer is a near-perfect inductor.

Quote
That is why chemistry breaks down matter to its more basic components and interactions.
An automotive mechanic does not diagnose/repair the entire car but its individual components.
An electronic engineer does not design the entire circuit but builds it up from individual components.
By the same token, a physicist decomposes complex phenomena into a complex arrangement of simple phenomena, so the constituents are easier to understand and calculate.

Do you want to discuss individual components? How far would you get?

In which of 7 cosmic planes and infinity of subplanes do you put your limit?

Would i hear it from you that density of matter, speed of light and rate of time flow all increase by factor of 49 for each next octave of light in the Creation.

Are we getting too deep, would you tell me that there are nearly 14 billion bubbles of non polar ultimate "atoms" of the next cosmic plane in the smallest "particle" of our plane, something akin to Planck length..

Would you tell me how is this Cosmic Forcefield produced from literally no-thing, simply by limited vibrations within infinite vibrations, through 12 axis of time and 60° offset...

Maybe you can tell me about bubbles of invisible neutral energy hitting our magnetic field and atmosphere and only then two of similar bubbles joining to produce polarized herzian waves....

Would you tell me about 3 phases of ONE FORCE in 4 great subforces cascading all the way down to matter and that altering all 3 in so called matter changes gravitational potential?

Would you tell me of secrets of the hail, 7 colors of darkness, the cold and negative gravity returning to the sun...

Or are we getting too deep into "individual components"

Quote
If I was to argue with you about all the phenomena* occurring in a "real coil" collectively, then the discussion would become so complex that it would quickly lose focus.
- resistance of a real coil.
- inter-turn capacitance of a real coil
- the displacement current through the above inter-turn capacitance
- the magnetic flux generated by the capacitance above.
- near fields generated by of a real coil
- far fields generated by a real coil
- radiation resistance of a real coil
- change of coil's geometry in inductance due to the Laplace force
- the skin effect in the winding of a real coil
- the proximity effect in the winding of a real coil
- the circumferential vs. axial current of real solenoidal coils.
- the myriad of ferromagnetic, ferrimagnetic and nuclear effects occurring in a real coil with a core, that I will not list here now.

So you googled for all phenomena associated with coils, all of which are known to me and most members here and all of which are totally irrelevant for the this thread which is about direction of voltage induced by a magnet approaching and leaving a coil of wire. VOLTAGE - IN OPEN CIRCUIT.

Ok if you wanted to discuss the difference when coil is shorted, then we could have some sensible talk cause current and associated backEMF does affect the voltage in the coil to a degree, but to go on a rant about perfect coil and insist on it is polluting the thread.

Quote
Thus, I am not apologizing for simplifying things and talking about the constituent phenomena depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) that started this discussion, separately.

You did not simplify anything, you just confused over something very clear and simple.

Quote
I will continue to decompose the phenomena manifested in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) which you linked in your 1st post, into their constituent phenomena, which are.
1) The pure inductance of an ideal coil
2) The resistance of the real coil
3) The magnetic flux generated by that large permanent magnet (especially its geometry).

P.S.
I don't think it is necessary to get into the BH curve of the permanent magnet (external flux source) in order to analyze the induction phenomenon occurring in a coil that is swept across this magnet's pole.
IMO we can disregard the real ferromagnetic phenomena occurring in the magnet and just treat it as an ideal magnetic flux source for the sake of keeping this discussion focused.
If you disagree to that simplification, then object.
Are you referring to the induced voltage depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) from your 1st post, or to some other current and voltage from another experiment?

Just stick to direction of voltage due to changing flux, we can talk current too but no need to get into hysteresis or magnetostriction or other secondary phenomena. Simple air core coil in PM field, as in the video.

Quote
Anyway, I claim that the current can lag applied voltage also in non-ideal inductors (i.e. in inductors accompanied by discrete or distributed resistances, which form a basic RL circuit such as this one (https://circuitdigest.com/sites/default/files/inlineimages/u/RL-Circuit.png)).

You claim? Current lags voltage in ANY circuit that has more inductive than capacitive reactance for that particular frequency.

Nothing to do with ideal coil.

Quote
Because of that, I cannot agree with your statement above, especially with the word "only".

Read my previous sentence.

Quote
Let's enumerate situations when the induced current is unipolar and when it is bipolar. Your statement above claims that it is always bipolar.

I claim that the induced current in an ideal shorted coil being swept across the pole of a permanent magnet (see the motion that I am referring to here (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)), will be:
1) unipolar when that coil enters only a region where the surface-flux at the pole dominates.
2) unipolar when that coil enters only a region where the return-flux at the pole dominates.
3) bipolar when that coil enters both regions enumerated above.

Additionally, I claim that the induced voltage across an open coil being swept across the pole of a permanent magnet (see the motion that I am referring to here (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)), will be:
4) Always bipolar, regardless whether the coil enters a region where the return flux dominates or not.

Finally, I claim that the induced current in closed RL circuit (such as a resistive coil) being swept across the pole of a permanent magnet (see the motion that I am referring to here (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif)), will:
5) approach unipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is large compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the surface-flux at the pole dominates.
6) bipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is small or equal compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the surface-flux at the pole dominates.
7) approach unipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is large compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the return-flux dominates.
8 ) bipolar when the L/R constant of that circuit is small or equal compared to the period of the motion and the coil enters a region where the return-flux dominates.
9) bipolar when that coil enters both the return-flux AND the surface-flux at the pole regardless of the L/R constant of that RL circuit.

Do you agree with all of the statements above. If "no" then please write me the numbers of the ones you disagree with.

You are overcomplicating a very simple phenomena. Coil cares not if it's near-the-pole flux or "return flux", it only feels change of flux cutting it.

If from state of no flux, flux starts to cut it it will self induce a voltage in one direction and as that same flux decreases in the opposite voltage.

In picture attached, as N passes to the right, voltage is such that electrons would go up, as N leaves it, electrons would go down.

I am here clearly ignoring the weaker side flux, that is assumed side flux would first induce smaller voltage opposite to pole flux voltage, and on the opposite side would help the voltage due to disappearing N.

Also, + flux increasing and - flux decreasing produce the same voltage

All of this is common knowledge.

(which reminds me of Figuera push-pull coils 180° out of phase)..

Quote
I claim that this animation (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) from prof. Belcher is not wrong and it supports my claims.
What are your reasons for stating that this animation is wrong ?

What makes you sure it's correct? And even if it is it applies to supeconductors only.

Quote
And I can invent many more expressions which reduce to magnetic flux, such as:

md^2/it^2 = Φ
RQ = Φ
vt = Φ
Li = Φ
Bd^2 = Φ
e/i = Φ
fd/i = Φ

where:
m = mass
d = distance
i = electric current
t = time
R = electric resistance
Q = charge
v = electric potential (voltage)
L = inductance
B = magnetic flux density
e = energy
f = force

I can use any of these relationships in the Farady's law to derive the fundamental relationship between rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) and the induced voltage.
But as long as they reduce to the rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) in the end, means that Faraday's this law depends fundamentally on roc of flux and not roc of flux density or any of the other related expansions listed above.

Practically, this means that in the end, a voltage induced across an open coil (according to this law) is dependent only on the rate of change of flux and the distribution of the flux density (B) in that coil does not alter the magnitude of that induced voltage.

Good for you, dB/dT is still a common expression of Faraday's law.

Quote
I will also go even further and add, that the magnitude of the current induced in an ideal shorted coil subjected to varying external flux, DOES NOT depend on the rate of change of flux dΦ/dt.
I claim that it only depends on the difference between the staring and ending magnitude of the external flux or ΔΦ.

Yes, I claim that in this scenario it does not matter how quickly the external flux changes and that the magnitude of the induced current will be the same regardless of the speed of the motion between the coil and magnet.

If you want to ascribe some unusual behavior to superconducting coil then you have to explain it in clear scientific manner, not just make a claim.

I have not studied induction in superconductors, all i know about superconducting coils it that they expel the magnetic field aka Meissner effect, that in them electrons join into Cooper pairs and that mass of the pair is less than two electrons' mass, that they produce gravitational anomalies in certain situations, Ning Li, Eugene Podkletnov etc...

But as far as induction i believe all that would happen is that current and voltage would be 90° outta phase.

Quote
That's dodging a question - not answering it.

Not dodging, it really is totally irrelevant for present subject.

Quote
The present discussion is concerned with the voltage and current induced in a coil as it is subjected to varying external flux from a permanent magnet.
The animation (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) depicts that.

Yes, regular resistive coil, not superconducting coil. That can be a thread of it's own, but not this one.

Quote
You cannot escape the consideration of idealized components because the scientific manner of performing a detailed analysis of a complex system is to decompose its complex behavior into a complex arrangement of simple behaviors.
I will discuss with you the resistive component of a real coil once we come to a consensus about the behavior of the purely inductive coil.

Bla bla. Not escaping anything, it's just that none of use use superconductors, but normal resistive coils.

Again, i don't know how exactly superconducting inductor behaves, i expressed my opinion above.

Quote
That geometrical opposition with respect to to a 3rd point - not an opposite point in an electric circuit such as a shorted ideal coil which does not even have a reference point.

Again you with ideal coil. We are talking about voltage distribution in a normal resistive coil.

Quote
I agree with that. Formally power it is the rate of change of energy. That "change" can refer the transfer of energy or to its conversion (e.g. into heat).

...

Quote
Not in this context because you wrote that: And when the definition of power is substituted into that statement then you get a nonsensical one statement like:
"rate of change of energy is consumed"

Again nitpicking, "consumes more power" or "uses more power" is common engineering term, no one interprets it the way you did and everyone knows the difference between power and energy.

Quote
Yes it is bad. You used a colloquialism which conflated power and energy....and then you tried to excuse it with Argumentum ad Numerum.

Someone give this man a cookie. :)

Quote
So be precise with your terminology and don't conflate power and energy in your statements anymore, even of most of the lay people do it routinely.

My God..

Quote
No, I was pointing out that the energy of imaginary (reactive) current is dissipated (converted to heat) by the real component of impedance (resistance).

No you just misassumed what is being conveyed.

Quote
Even if I correct your first mistake by substituting "energy" for "power" and write:
"...energy is consumed by inductive reactance"
That statement is still wrong because Inductive Reactance is the imaginary component of impedance and as such it cannot "consume" the energy carried by the reactive current.
To consume/dissipate that energy as heat a real resistance is required. Only then the equation for the dissipated power Pdissipated=Ri^2 applies.  The same equation with the inductive reactance (XL) substituted for the real resistance (R) is false, in mathspeak: Pdissipated<>Xi^2.
You are using imprecise terminology again.
First of all the phrase "power consumes" is wrong, because power cannot consume anything.
Also, in this context to "consume" means to "dissipate as heat" or to "convert to heat" since energy cannot be destroyed.
The phenomenon responsible for the conversion of electric energy in this case is the resistance of the copper (the real component of impedance) according to Pdissipated=Ri^2.
So your statement should be corrected as follows:
"...all I meant was that the resistance of the copper dissipates/consumes/converts the energy associated with the reactive current".

Damn..

Already addressed that nonsense, no need to repeat. I know what i meant, but you misinterpreted it that i meant reactive power is real power which is silly, i talked about reactive power in other threads, you are the one who doesn't seem to grasp what it is.

Quote
I did not mention a whole lot of things, which I know, but what of it?
Also, why do you think that the 90° phase shift of voltage and current is a key point in the experiment depicted in that video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) in your original post, that deserved to be mentioned ?

If you have to ask that, i really have no comment.

Quote
You are reacting to it as if I was changing the subject but the decomposition of complex phenomena into a complex arrangement of simple phenomena is a basic tool of science.
I am not opposed to adding the behavior and properties of resistance to ideal coils to later obtain the behavior and properties of real coils. But first we need to discuss these phenomena individually, because if we don't agree about the basic phenomena, how can we agree about their combination ?

There is a great difference between complex and confused.

Quote
"Sudden" is a very relative concept.  All I claim is that the function of flux's direction vs. position is continuous and passes through zero.

"Passes through zero" has no duration in time. It's a point of switching from one flux to another. Zoom into the waveform as much as you want, that crossing point will always have 0 duration in time.

Quote
No, they don't prove me wrong. The picture displayed by the scope simply does not show everything as it depends on the setting of its time base.
Noting happens "immediately" and the direction of the flux, which is integrated by the coil's contour. Flux cannot reverse instantaneously nor without crossing the zero magnitude.

Well, if zero has duration, it is too short to be observed on an oscilloscope. And this is for voltage induced by HAND, how short is it then.

Quote
Simple? I think Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger need you for their studies.

Well, well, well, we got an attempt at ad-hominem with what appears to be a clumsily constructed cynicism, usually indicating an insecure person of lower intellectual capacity.

Quote
Yes

So that is why you base your "argument" on youtube animation never mentioning your real life experience. Interesting.

Quote
Would you like to be left alone in blissful ignorance ?

If i'm ignorant, what would that make you, a fly?

Quote
Since you acknowledge at all, that there is a "combination" of phenomena at play in the experiment performed in the video linked in your original post, so why do thou protest so much at my attempts to discuss these component phenomena individually with you?

I'm not protesting anything, you got a strange fixation on ideal coil, ironically again, i had to write it for you that household transfomer is a near perfect inductor..

Quote
The jury is still out, but they are watching...

For someone to talk so much about perfect inductor and not even mention a voltage-current phaseshift, well..

Quote
Do you mean the voltage induced in that experiment referred to in your original post, where a coil is swept in front of a magnet's pole and of which you have posted this scopeshot (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/dlattach/attach/178960/) ?

I am talking in general.

Quote
Also, asserting the knowledge of my knowledge is a pretty arrogant statement without telepathy. You would not write that if you read my other posts on this forum on the subject.

Well, i do have some 6th sense powers..

Quote
I agree with the existence Laplace force but the force exerted on a current carrying wire (such as a coil) when immersed in magnetic flux is a new subject.
I though we ware limiting our conversation only to the induced voltage and current in coils.

I don't think we need to discus this because we both agree about the existence, magnitude and direction of the force exerted on a current carrying wire

I'm posting a pic just in case.

Quote
Only half of the time

Always if you travel at 1,000 miles per hour along the equator.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 08, 2020, 02:56:10 AM
All your rant comes down to ascribing some mystical properties to pure inductor, which you yourself can't define nor explain, meanwhile you "forgot" ordinary transformer is a near-perfect inductor.
I am not ascribing mystical properties to the ideal inductor.  I am ascribing properties that we can measure and calculate and predict.
Transformers are a composite devices composed out of at least two inductors, at least two interacting fluxes, at least two resistances and a combination of ferromagnetic phenomena. As such, it is a device that is much more complicated than the EM induction in a coil by a moving permanent magnet we were discusson.  Do you need to introduce a new device to complicate the present debate about a simple air core coil in a moving PM field, as depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw)?

Do you want to discuss individual components? How far would you get?
In which of 7 cosmic planes and infinity of subplanes do you put your limit?
As basic as we have the math for.
Do you have math for these cosmic planes which allows to calculate the voltage and current induced in a coil ?

Would i hear it from you that density of matter, speed of light and rate of time flow all increase by factor of 49 for each next octave of light in the Creation.
Are we getting too deep, would you tell me that there are nearly 14 billion bubbles of non polar ultimate "atoms" of the next cosmic plane in the smallest "particle" of our plane, something akin to Planck length..
Would you tell me how is this Cosmic Forcefield produced from literally no-thing, simply by limited vibrations within infinite vibrations, through 12 axis of time and 60° offset...
Maybe you can tell me about bubbles of invisible neutral energy hitting our magnetic field and atmosphere and only then two of similar bubbles joining to produce polarized herzian waves....
Would you tell me about 3 phases of ONE FORCE in 4 great subforces cascading all the way down to matter and that altering all 3 in so called matter changes gravitational potential?
Would you tell me of secrets of the hail, 7 colors of darkness, the cold and negative gravity returning to the sun...
Or are we getting too deep into "individual components"
Now you are getting away from quantifiable reality and escaping into esoterica.

So you googled for all phenomena associated with coils, all of which are known to me and most members here
I did not have to Google them, because I discussed most of these phenomena on this forum years ago.
...and as recently as two weeks week ago I was struggling with some of them on the overunityresearch forum. Namely, the skin effect, proximity effect and the inter-turn capacitance and associated magnetic flux generated by the displacement current distorting the flux generated by my coils for an NMR experiment.

and all of which are totally irrelevant for the this thread which is about direction of voltage induced by a magnet approaching and leaving a coil of wire. VOLTAGE - IN OPEN CIRCUIT.
I'm fine with limiting the discussion here to the timing, magnitude and direction of voltage & current induced by a magnet approaching and leaving a coil of wire. I do not want to change the subject of this conversation by including the combination of multitude of phenomena occurring in transformers and other devices. I want to simplify this conversation by talking about more basic component phenomena in the subject at hand.

Notice, that I added the current and deleted you restriction to "OPEN COILS ONLY", because open coils are just big Noting Burgers that don't produce all the fancy magnetic effects including forces and transfers, storage and conversions of energy.  Energy is the primary concern of this forum.

I thought we already agreed about this, since you wrote that:
Yes, current is needed to produce all the fancy magnetic effects and there was zero need to waste server space with that.

Ok if you wanted to discuss the difference when coil is shorted, then we could have some sensible talk...
Yes we should have a sensible talk about the entire range of coil operating regimes: from ideal shorted coils --> through RL circuits comprised of such coils + resistance in series --> all the way to open coils.
Notice that the behaviors of a coil in all of these operating regimes are covered by an LR circuit with its resistance varying from zero to infinity.

cause current and associated backEMF does affect the voltage in the coil to a degree,
To what degree?

Just stick to direction of voltage due to changing flux, we can talk current too but no need to get into hysteresis or magnetostriction or other secondary phenomena. Simple air core coil in PM field, as in the video.
...but to go on a rant about perfect coil and insist on it is polluting the thread.
I'd be happy to stick to that and not complicate the discussion with secondary phenomena.
However, the behavior of perfect coils is NOT a secondary phenomenon - rather it is component phenomenon, that results from the deconstruction of the inductance + resistance combination (a resistive coil or RL circuit).

Current lags voltage in ANY circuit that has more inductive than capacitive reactance for that particular frequency.
...
I am talking in general.
When you talk in general, do you refer to all LR circuits regardless of their resistance and source of energy ?
...or only to experiments involving the simple air core coil in a moving PM field, like the one depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) ?

You are overcomplicating a very simple phenomena. Coil cares not if it's near-the-pole flux or "return flux", it only feels change of flux cutting it.
Do you mean the delta of flux lines cut (ΔΦ) ...or the rate of change of these cuts (dΦ/dt) ?

Please just answer the question and write me the numbers of statements that you disagree with, so I don't have to guess what you mean?
You can disagree with all, none or some. At most you will have to write 9 numbers - it is not much work.

I will continue when you reply
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 03:25:35 AM
"You are getting away from quantifiable reality" on the contrary i have been talking of fundamental bubbles of energy making up all realities, the fundamental ratio of 49...etc. These are physical LAWS unknown to you.

"escaping into esoterica" ha, what you call esoterica is simply deeper science

To you all is "escaping" when in fact you keep escaping into fantasies about ideal coil while missing the basic knowledge on the subject like phase shift in reactive circuits, direction of electron flow when north flux cuts wire to the right (or the opposite)... and the worst being very smothering.

I am not wasting a second more responding to you.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 08, 2020, 11:58:59 AM
"escaping into esoterica" ha, what you call esoterica is simply deeper science
Then open up a new thread and educate all of us about this "deeper science".  I will be happy to participate.
...but until you show me some math that can calculate the direction and magnitudes of voltage and current induced in a coil by a moving magnet from this deeper science - it does not constitute an argument in the discussion at hand in this thread.

To you all is "escaping" when in fact you keep escaping into fantasies about ideal coil
Inductors without resistance are not a fantasy - they are real devices even if they are expensive ones.
But most importantly they are COMPONENTS of RL circuits.

while missing the basic knowledge on the subject like phase shift in reactive circuits

Which circuits are you referring to?
I asked you a concrete question about this before (see below) and you avoided the answer:
Quote
Current lags voltage in ANY circuit that has more inductive than capacitive reactance for that particular frequency.
...
I am talking in general.
When you talk in general, do you refer to all LR circuits regardless of their resistance and source of energy ?
...or only to experiments involving the simple air core coil in a moving PM field, like the one depicted in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw) ?

You also avoided the answer to the important question listed below, that would be as easy for you as writing 9 numbers - not complicated at all.

The opposite directions of the magnet's return flux and pole flux evidently occur as demonstrated by the gaussmeter in the video at 1:15 (https://youtu.be/KmENeg5YSCw?t=75).  This animation (https://i.imgur.com/6gBXOit.gif) and this FEMM simulation (http://this FEMM simulation) also show different regions with opposite directions of flux.
I am sorry that the detailed analysis of the induction in the coil (modeled as an RL circuit) as it travels through these regions exceeds your threshold of acceptable complication. I can't help that the coil goes through all these regions in that experiment.

Nonetheless, such detailed analysis is the only path to settle the issue whether the current induced in a shorted coil can be unipolar ("DC" as you refer to it).

Quote
You are overcomplicating a very simple phenomena. Coil cares not if it's near-the-pole flux or "return flux", it only feels change of flux cutting it.
Do you mean the delta of flux lines cut (ΔΦ) ...or the rate of change of these cuts (dΦ/dt) ?

Please just answer the question and write me the numbers of statements that you disagree with, so I don't have to guess what you mean?
You can disagree with all, none or some. At most you will have to write 9 numbers - it is not much work.

I am not wasting a second more responding to you.
Do you consider your position so untenable that it cannot withstand a debate?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 02:23:17 PM
Quote
You also avoided the answer to the important question listed below, that would be as easy for you as writing 9 numbers - not complicated at all.
I am not avoiding anything, it's just that you are posting tons of confused garbage about something very simple and very clear.

Quote
The opposite directions of the magnet's return flux and pole flux evidently occur as demonstrated by the gaussmeter in the video at 1:15.  This animation and this FEMM simulation also show different regions with opposite directions of flux.

Again repeating what i been saying since first post and what would be perfectly assumed even if i did not.

Quote
I am sorry that the detailed analysis of the induction in the coil (modeled as an RL circuit) as it travels through these regions exceeds your threshold of acceptable complication.

Eh the irony again. Complication in your case means confusion, not complexity. To quote Einstein, if you can't explain it simply so a child can understand, you do not understand it..it fits you perfectly.

You don't have clear understanding of any of the discussed phenomena, you think if you pile up more and more confused stuff you will create an image of understanding. I knew your level since your first post.

You didn't even know the direction of induced voltage nor the current lagging voltage in an inductor, nor that transformer is near perfect inductor (you accepted superconductors as only way to talk about your ideal coil fantasy).... you are a joke.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 08, 2020, 03:31:04 PM
Seems a weird comment here

NX85 quote
You didn't even know the direction of induced voltage nor the current lagging voltage in an inductor, nor that transformer is near perfect inductor (you accepted superconductors as only way to talk about your ideal coil fantasy).... you are a joke
End quote

I Have read many times in this forum
Verpies sharing the opposite of many points in your statement
Above

Would be nice you answer a few questions
Any topic which would enlighten Verpies

Would be a discussion worth having IMO

Many here feel you are just looking to start
Conflict or make moot points

Your comments read as vague assumptions
Or over simplifying a much deeper
Subject

What is your goal ?

Just answer a few numbers
Jumping all around waving hands with no format?

Looks sloppy too?
Please Answer the points ?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 03:50:59 PM
Many here feel you are just looking to start
Conflict or make moot points

Are you kidding or you are just being unrealistic due to your friendship with him?

Do you see his posts, he overcomplicates the subject while not understanding the basics.

He is draining my energy and wasting my time instead of trying to understand better.

Quote
Would be nice you answer a few questions
Any topic which would enlighten Verpies

Answer what, give me ONE CLEAR question he made.

Quote
Your comments read as vague assumptions
Or over simplifying a much deeper
Subject

Ha, now you talk like him. I am not simplifying, it IS simple.

I described EXACTLY what happens in my first post.

We can talk closed coil too, then we have to account for backEMF that will resist the second spike but it's still simple.

All in nature is simple, only a blind person makes it seem complicated.

Of course there is infinity of factors which can affect the waveform, create various ripples, harmonics etc etc..but this is not the subject.

Quote
What is your goal ?

Goal is always the same, as in all my threads and posts, better, clearer understanding of all phenomena, not "steel cage fights".
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 08, 2020, 04:38:10 PM
Verpies is a builder
He is the rarest of them all

Open source very talented builder!!

You just like to write?

Or you want to ruin a perfect opportunity
To make whatever point you are trying to make manifest into a build?

Engage his questions and show merit to your claim !

And then you will see it built?

——////—///—////
I have watched many argue against Verpies
When he was actually making points you falsely claim
He is ignorant of!

I have also seen debates much deeper than this
With persons willing and able to debate in real time!!

Are you passionate enuff to persevere through a few
Questions

Knowing on the other side will be a build?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 08, 2020, 04:42:46 PM
Ps
I am friend to any man who furthers open source understanding
Of FE
As it applies to the mission statement here!!

You too if you are genuine and sincere !

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 08, 2020, 04:52:23 PM
Scope shot of magnets passing a coil.  Coil does have a core like most real coils not like the one shown in the video being promoted by Nix.  The magnets are neo arranged slightly differently than normal.  The circuit is open with no load on the coil.  I suspect Verpies already knows how to get this waveform from a magnet passing a coil.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 05:35:13 PM
Verpies is a builder
He is the rarest of them all

Open source very talented builder!!

You just like to write?

So you assumed i am not a builder... I have 2 generators behind me 3rd just being built, and one inertial device.

I don't brag about my skills, best things do not even get posted here!

Quote
Or you want to ruin a perfect opportunity
To make whatever point you are trying to make manifest into a build?

Whaaat? You think i want him to build something for me. Hahahah.

Quote
Engage his questions and show merit to your claim !

He never made 1 clear question so there is nothing to engage.

I don't make claims, what i said is common knowledge.

Quote
And then you will see it built?

Again it seems you imply i want someone to build something.

I'll just say if i depended on others to do it for me i'd rather find another occupation.

Not counting hiring a CNC guy of course, or similar things you don't have proper tools for.

Quote
——////—///—////
I have watched many argue against Verpies
When he was actually making points you falsely claim
He is ignorant of!

Sure, sure.

Quote
I have also seen debates much deeper than this
With persons willing and able to debate in real time!!

I can debate in real time, but this is not a debate, what he is doing is wasting everyone's time.

I seen tons of "deeper" debates on this forum going back 10+ years, the problem is what you call deeper is in 99% cases confusion.

Quote
Are you passionate enuff to persevere through a few
Questions

Again, what questions? Give one intelligent and clear question and i will surely not ignore it.

Quote
Knowing on the other side will be a build?

Again it seems you imply i want you to build something, LOL.

Quote
Ps
I am friend to any man who furthers open source understanding
Of FE
As it applies to the mission statement here!!

You too if you are genuine and sincere !

My threads speak for me.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 08, 2020, 05:45:07 PM
I did not realize you are an open source builder?
Do you have links to your builds here?

It is important you show things that others can replicate ?
To advance understanding ( as Verpies has done here for many years)

I have no such claim ?
You apparently do?

Thanks for sharing your work!!
Can you repost the links to your builds here?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 05:46:42 PM
I don't talk about unfinished projects, call it bad luck.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 05:54:56 PM
Quote
Coil does have a core like most real coils

Cores are suicide. Enough said.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 08, 2020, 06:30:14 PM
So no builds lest you be vulnerable?
Verpies and others share and ask for input/ help regularly!

With 100% transparency

Their experiments...LENR or NMR are intuitive paths

Perhaps you set the same standard and others can
Help or make suggestions (as Verpies and itsu and others do here and elsewhere?

Please let’s not fight with math and images

Teach on the bench ..what you have to share?
Many will respect that ( all)
It’s the best a person can do here !
And it’s what this forum is about!

Open source
Carroll ...Citfta is also a builder !

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 06:51:15 PM
Just don't imply i am not transparent, i did much for OU awareness over last almost 10 years.

These things are still done in privacy, otherwise they ALWAYS fail.

If you are successful, later you can share all or as much as you feel fit.

Often the solution is sooo simple your intuition tells you "how did i not see it before" and then you realize technology is not the issue, but mankind's awareness and morality.

Look at Don Smith, James Schwartz, Kapanadze or hundreds of other OU inventors.. They gave general directions, not step by step instructions.

Even if exact instructions are given these systems are often delicate and hard to replicate.

Don't give man a fish, teach him how to fish, give him knowledge, inspire him, push him in right direction.

No matter how much i was for it before..I am now more for sharing of essential electrical knowledge that's lacking, than sharing a-b instructions how to build a overunity device.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: bistander on October 08, 2020, 07:09:11 PM
Cores are suicide. Enough said.

Hi nix85,
"Cores are suicide." I like to hear more about your statement. Please elaborate.
Thanks,
bi
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 07:19:20 PM
Well, there are many OU systems with cores, it's just my preference.

Figuera, Kunel..use cores.

I don't.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 08, 2020, 07:44:40 PM
You seem to have a strong opinion on OU being readily available
And many to chose from ?

Perhaps just one anomaly ?

However small?

This must be your reason for engaging
You have seen things ??

One quick question since air cores are being
Mentioned

Please don’t be offended
Is Rick F someone you consider?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 08, 2020, 08:06:11 PM
Just don't imply i am not transparent, i did much for OU awareness over last almost 10 years.

These things are still done in privacy, otherwise they ALWAYS fail.

If you are successful, later you can share all or as much as you feel fit.

Often the solution is sooo simple your intuition tells you "how did i not see it before" and then you realize technology is not the issue, but mankind's awareness and morality.

Look at Don Smith, James Schwartz, Kapanadze or hundreds of other OU inventors.. They gave general directions, not step by step instructions.

Even if exact instructions are given these systems are often delicate and hard to replicate.

Don't give man a fish, teach him how to fish, give him knowledge, inspire him, push him in right direction.

No matter how much i was for it before..I am now more for sharing of essential electrical knowledge that's lacking, than sharing a-b instructions how to build a overunity device.

Nix,

I do not agree with your philosophy highlighted above.  Why?  Well first, show me one valid replication of the inventors you listed above or any inventor that gives only general directions.  Second, most replicators if not all need "instructions" not theory.  For example, I give you one of my theoretical devices with enough info for a device build.  This resembles Citfta's post.

For any that might be interested, this is an improved design of coil/core used in tangential induction.  The idea is to have as large an area in one polarity as compared to the opposite polarity in a coil's        current that has been induced with a tangential PM field.

The pix below is the PM and coil assembly used for this test.  The elongated core is 7 pieces of 1/4 ferrite E cores with 30 turns of 15-34 litz wire and the PM was moved past the core by hand.

The first scope pix shows an area of 2.975mAs for the total current waveform.

The second scope pix show an area of 4.265mAs for the positive area of the waveform.

From this we can calculate the negative area from 2.975mAs-4.265mAs = -1.29mAs.  Therefore, the positive to negative ratio is [4.265]/[1.29] = 3.32:1 .

What good is this?  Well, by using a balancing magnetic or electromagnetic arrangement on a rotor that will null the Lenz effect from the positive PM induction in this case, a very low drag PM generator can be built which should produce OU.

Regards,
Pm

Pm

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 08:17:20 PM
Ramset, here is something more than an anomaly, altho low speed and torque, real working magnet only motor. You can see how he placed magnets at 90° to cancel resistance and how extremely delicate it is. Just one simple, raw example.

https://youtu.be/vkcFRLQiVGk?list=PLS6CmWwu5VGmYsgX5-2kFtPsE-iIsXj_o&t=161
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 08:21:47 PM
partzman here is one valid replication of Kapanadze from Russia, unless you think it's fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNMkiIov5NM
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 08:28:01 PM
Few flywheel vids too

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLS6CmWwu5VGl_vd5AX8FRPp7_nSc3vWbo

Here is a 'secret' for you if you will replicate the flywheel system, use 2:1 reduction from motor to flywheel and 2:1 from flywheel to low rpm alternator (or even 3:1 and 3:1). Flywheel should be 60kg and 60cm wide for 3-4kw excess power. Have not tried this, these are instructions from guy from Brazil who left a comment on YT video with failed flywheel experiment and gave instructions how he succeeded.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 08, 2020, 09:03:46 PM
Forgot to answer about Rick Friedrich, i am subbed to his channel but that is more less only for entertainment value.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 01:08:32 AM
I am not avoiding anything

Let's see if that's really true...

You didn't even know the direction of induced voltage nor the current lagging voltage in an inductor,
So below is ANOTHER question for you:

Q: Why do you think that "the current lagging voltage in an inductor" is relevant to the case of a permanent magnet moving across a simple air core coil, as in this video (https://youtu.be/KmENeg5YSCw?t=235), which was the subject of our discussion ?

How will you avoid answering it this time?  Will you:
1) call me a derogatory name,
2) use an excuse that it is "unclear",
3) use an excuse that it is "irrelevant",
4) use an excuse that it is "too complicated",
5) use an excuse that it is "too simple",
6) claim that if I have to ask that, then you have no comment,
7) claim it is nonsense,
8 ) write "Bla Bla",
9) write that "the sky is blue",
10) ...just ignore it ?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 01:18:01 AM
Quote from: verpies

Why do you think that "the current lagging voltage in an inductor" is relevant to case of a permanent magnet moving across a simple air core coil, as in this video (https://youtu.be/KmENeg5YSCw?t=235), which was the subject of our discussion ?

bla bla

It is not relevant for the video cause coil in the video has small inductance, i wrote clearly that i'm referring to your ideal coil fantasy.

For that it is not only relevant but essential, yet you never happened to mention it, hmm.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 01:30:44 AM
It is not relevant for the video cause coil in the video has small inductance, i wrote clearly that i'm referring to your ideal coil fantasy.
For that it is not only relevant but essential, yet you never happened to mention it, hmm.
So tell me why I should have mentioned it or why do you think that "the current lagging voltage in an inductor" is relevant to the case of a permanent magnet moving across an air core coil with zero resistance ?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 01:42:05 AM
So tell me why I should have mentioned it or why do you think that "the current lagging voltage in an inductor" is relevant to the case of a permanent magnet moving across an air core coil with zero resistance ?

Go watch your little animation again and you will notice current only starts to move when magnet stops to move. What do you think is that mysterious delay. The essential point.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 01:52:31 AM
Go watch your little animation (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) again and you will notice current only starts to move when magnet stops to move.
No, the current "moves" anytime the magnet tries to change the amount* of flux penetrating the sc loop. The current also moves while the magnet is still moving, alebeit slower.

What do you think is that mysterious delay. The essential point.
The current also moves while the magnet is still moving, albeit slower... so this means there is NO DELAY !

I will even go even further and write that in that sc loop, the magnitude of the current does not depend on the speed of the magnet at all.
For example in this animation (https://youtu.be/bHVvMFVIaFY), if you held that magnet inside that sc loop with your hand, so that it is stationary, then the current would circulate in that sc loop at constant magnitude ...as long as you hold that magnet there. ...and in this animation (https://youtu.be/uL4pfisCX14) - as you hold the magnet outside of the loop, because of the different position of the magnet (and amount of its flux penetrating the loop) at the instant when the loop became shorted.

I'll give you another hint, inductance is inversely proportional to resistance. Still no lamps on?
No, because resistance is inversely proportional to conductance not to inductance.

Go watch your little animation again
But I asked you why you think that "the current lagging voltage in an inductor" is relevant to the case of a permanent magnet moving across an air core coil with zero resistance.
I did not ask you what I should do to guess why you think that.

Actually, I am surprised that you sent me back to prof. Belchers animation, because earlier you stated that it is misleading.
You are wrong. Like i said, your confusion is rooted in that misleading animation. Again, the only difference in ideal inductor is that voltage will lead by 90° degrees just like current will for purely capacitive circuit.

* That change is relative to the amount of flux that happened to penetrate the loop at the instant it became shorted.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 02:10:55 AM
No, the current "moves" anytime the magnet tries to change the amount* of flux penetrating the sc loop. The current also moves while the magnet is still moving, alebeit slower.

Wrong.

Quote
The current also moves while the magnet is still moving, albeit slower... so this means there is NO DELAY !

In ideal inductor delay will always be exactly 90°.

Quote
I will even go further and write that in that sc loop, the magnitude of the current does not depend on the speed of the magnet at all.  For example if you held that magnet inside that sc loop with your hand, so that it is still, then the current would circulate in that sc loop at constant magnitude.

You can as well claim that you been to the Moon.

Quote
No, because resistance is inversely proportional to conductance not to inductance.
* The amount of flux that happened to penetrate the loop at the instant it became shorted.

I meant energy stored by coil's inductance is inversely proportional to resistance. More current flows through a coil more energy it stores and bigger the EMF spike upon sudden stopping of current.

Point being, you deny the basic law of physics that in purely inductive circuit current will always lag voltage by 90°. This is the school definition of ideal inductor.

Do you realize how silly it is to deny this. Do you realize ordinary transformer has almost 90° phase shift and that tiny aberration is due to resistance, without it it would have pure 90° phase shift.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 02:22:46 AM
In ideal inductor delay will always be exactly 90°.
In the case of a permanent magnet moving inside or across an air core coil, too ?

Point being, you deny the basic law of physics that in purely inductive circuit current will always lag voltage by 90°. This is the school definition of ideal inductor.
I heave never read a definition mentioning a lag between the induced current and induced voltage in an inductive circuit. Do you think this is because I dropped out of school too early?

Do you realize how idiotic it is to deny this.
Yes and if you are right that the induced voltage leads the induced current in a coreless inductor/coil that is subjected to a varying external magnetic flux from a permanent magnet moving inside or across that coil THEN I will send 1 Bitcoin (1 BTC) to the account of your choice.

How much will you send me if I am right ?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 03:14:40 AM
In the case of a permanent magnet moving inside or across an air core coil, too ?

bla bla

Last few posts you started dodging by grabbing onto air core coils... in desperate hope that phase shift doesn't apply to them...to your dismay, it does. Here is some a-level physics for you, core or no core...

The circuit which contains only inductance (L) and not any other quantities like resistance and capacitance in the circuit is called a Pure inductive circuit. In this type of circuit, the current lags behind the voltage by an angle of 90 degrees.

Use that bitcoin for basic electronics course, it might do you well.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 03:51:40 AM
Last few posts you started dodging by grabbing onto air core coils...
in desperate hope that phase shift doesn't apply to them...to your dismay, it does.
Don't change the subject. It is not about that.
Air core (or coreless) coils are just simpler to discuss as they are devoid of secondary phenomena such as the magnetostriction, which you've mentioned and which I do not want to deal with.

Here is some a-level physics for you, core or no core...
The circuit which contains only inductance (L) and not any other quantities like resistance and capacitance in the circuit is called a Pure inductive circuit. In this type of circuit, the current lags behind the voltage by an angle of 90 degrees.
You are avoiding answering my questions again. (Hint: they can be identified by the question marks at their end).

Let's try with another one:
Q: Does that a-level physics statement, you just quoted above, apply to an inductive circuit which is subjected to an external varying magnetic flux from a permanent magnet moving inside or across the inductor in that circuit and to the lead/lag between the induced voltage and induced current in it ?  Core or no core.

Simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

Use that bitcoin for basic electronics course, it might do you well.
I really would like to send it to you if you are right.  You will have earned it with your time and energy and dedication to the truth in science ...and I still have plenty more for a basic electronics course that will help me not to mislead the users of this forum.

How much will you send me if I am right ?

EDIT:
By now, it is obvious to me that my arguments, no mater how cogent & logical, will not change your entrenched position, so I have to ask: What would constitute a proof for you?
-Would a judgement by a higher authority constitute a proof for you?
-Would empirical evidence coming from someone else constitute a proof for you ?
Do tell us, what would you accept as proof in the 1BTC challenge (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869) ?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 01:04:20 PM
Don't change the subject. It is not about that.
Air core (or coreless) coils are just simpler to discuss as they are devoid of secondary phenomena such as the magnetostriction, which you've mentioned and which I do not want to deal with.

I'm not changing the subject, you are, dodging in all (im)possible ways.

Quote
You are avoiding answering my questions again. (Hint: they can be identified by the question marks at their end).

Not avoiding, it's just that you still hope this LAW somehow does not apply if voltage is induced by moving magnet. I see desperation also amplifies attempts at sarcasm. To your dismay...

Quote
Let's try with another one:
Q: Does that a-level physics statement, you just quoted above, apply to an inductive circuit which is subjected to an external varying magnetic flux from a permanent magnet moving inside or across the inductor in that circuit and to the lead/lag between the induced voltage and induced current in it ?  Core or no core.

Simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

...it does. Completely irrelevant if voltage is brought to the inductor from external circuit or induced by changing magnetic field, in ideal inductor current will always lag voltage by 90°.

Quote
I really would like to send it to you if you are right.  You will have earned it with your time and energy and dedication to the truth in science ...and I still have plenty more for a basic electronics course that will help me not to mislead the users of this forum.

How much will you send me if I am right ?

There are many preschool level electronic courses online for free, those are best suited for you and you can save that bitcoin for a candy.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 01:35:31 PM
...it does. Completely irrelevant if voltage is brought to the inductor from external circuit or induced by changing magnetic field, in ideal inductor current will always lag voltage by 90°.
OK, thank you for replying directly. Now your position is clear.

For the record, I indeed think that this "law" about the i&v lag does does not apply when the voltage is induced by the moving magnet.

[/font]
There are many preschool level electronic courses online for free, those are best suited for you and you can save that bitcoin for a candy.
If I am found wrong about this, I will take all these preschool level electronic courses and I will apologize publicly for every false and confused statement, that I have made in this discussion and I will promise that I will not mislead the members of this forum anymore. I will also rethink my life and realize that my mind is loose and unable to reason coherently and that I am biased, dishonest and unable to let go of my cherished preconceived notions and that I have been full of myself and overly confident and suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect all this time.

If I am found wrong, then I will really send you the 1 BTC - don't worry, I still have more for these preschool-level courses.
How much will you send me if the result is opposite?

So what would constitute a proof for you?
It is obvious that arguments from me will not suffice, no matter how cogent and logical I make them...
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 01:46:41 PM
Quote
I indeed think that this "law" about the i&v lag does does not apply when the voltage is induced by the moving magnet.

It's a general rule for ideal inductors, it matters not the least how voltage is induced.

Save the bitcoin for a candy, to award yourself as you go through those preschool el. lessons.

You had no arguments so far, only false claims, this being a perfect example.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 02:16:11 PM
It's a general rule for ideal inductors, it matters not the least how voltage is induced.
It is clear now, that you believe this and that I do not.

You had no arguments so far, only false claims, this being a perfect example.
That is true only in the recent posts, because at this point in the discussion it has become clear to me, that you've made up you mind and you will not accept any arguments from me.
This is why I ceased arguing recently and concentrated on spelling out the differences between our knowledges and beliefs, using concise and precise claims.

Thus, in order to resolve these differences and to obtain the objective proof or disproof in this issue, we have to go beyond my arguments.

So what would constitute an objective proof for you?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 03:18:30 PM
What arguments? You are expressing your BELIEF.

I am referring to well known LAW of physics.

If you believe the law does not apply for moving magnet, burden of proof is on you.

You said you worked with sc, so try it. Pass a magnet over sc coil and see voltage current phase.

If you don't have access to sc, a high inductance, and low resistance and capacitance coil will do as well.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 03:22:37 PM
If you believe the law does not apply for moving magnet, burden of proof is on you.
I think it is customary for laws to be proven, rather than disproven.
I don't believe that what you wrote is the universal "law".  It does not even have mathematical formula defining the alleged time lag between the current resulting from induced voltage.

...but in the interest of cooperation, I can accept the burden of disproving that "law".

To do that, I need to know what would constitute an objective disproof to you?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 03:25:14 PM
I don't believe that what you wrote is the "law" but I can accept the burden of disproving your "law".

To do that, I need to know what would constitute an objective proof to you?

It is a law, to claim otherwise is idiocy.

I just wrote what.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 03:39:54 PM
I think it is customary for laws to be proven, rather than disproven.

That current lags voltage by  90° in inductive circuit is as well known as Ohm's law, it's "proven" by millions of engineers every single day.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 03:53:09 PM
It is a law, to claim otherwise is idiocy.
It is not an idiocy. According to the scientific method every law must be falsifiable.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 04:01:34 PM
That current lags voltage by  90° in inductive circuit
My stance is, that this is true only if an external voltage is applied to the inductor.

is as well known as Ohm's law
Ohm's law is a different law that does not involve pure inductors. As such, it does not have to make the distinction between two modes of energy delivery to an inductor - the magnetic one and the electric one.

... it's "proven" by millions of engineers every single day.
So would a disproof of the i&v lag in a single inductive circuit, which is NOT subjected to an externally applied voltage, be an acceptable disproof for you if it is performed by a person other than me?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 09, 2020, 04:03:19 PM
Well
As mentioned before
There are Venues and persons who
Can help
Example below

Perhaps it would be good to establish a rapport
With some moderators there at physics forums or EE forums or similar elsewhere ...
To help judge such debates?

https://physics.stackexchange.com/ (https://physics.stackexchange.com/)

So many times here there are persons hoping to engage
The scientific perspective !

Having a venue to ask for help judging ??

Would be good for real-time debates!!

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 04:24:52 PM
It is not an idiocy. According to the scientific method every law must be falsifiable.

That is relative thing since all physical laws can be skewed or bypassed in certain ways, but within certain limits they hold true, see below for an example.

Quote
My stance is, that this is true only if an external voltage is applied to the inductor.

Your belief.

Quote
Ohm's law is a different law that does not involve pure inductors. As such, it does not have to make the distinction between two modes of energy delivery to an inductor - the magnetic one and the electric one.every law must be falsifiable

Ohm's law has it's exceptions, incandescent bulb totally ignores Ohm's law, as filament gets hotter it's resistance increases and Ohm's law is out of window, reverse happens in Neon tube with negative resistance, voltage falls with increasing current after the bulb reaches it's breakdown voltage. Etc.

Quote
So would a disproof of the i&v lag in a single inductive circuit, which is NOT subjected to an externally applied voltage, be an acceptable disproof for you if it was performed empirically by a person other than me?

Show me a near purely inductive circuit in which current does not lag voltage as magnet passes across the coil and i'll be happy to admit this law is bypassed in such case.

PS. since you will using resistive coil to prove something about ideal coils, use as thick wire as possible and at least 50 turns.

This is a tricky thing to do since you should not break the circuit. To do it right you should use two coils, one for voltage and another for current, measure current with a clamp probe for oscilloscope.

Small number of turns coil of same diameter will do for voltage.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 09, 2020, 04:58:40 PM
The problem with some of the people on these type of forums is they get some knowledge from YouTube or elsewhere and think they know more than those of us that have worked in electronics for years.  Let's look at one example of their misunderstanding.

Most anyone that has studied electronics for even a little while has heard the expression "Eli the Iceman".  And they have been taught that means that voltage leads current in an inductor and current leads voltage in a capacitor.  That adage of course is true if we are talking about CHARGING a coil or capacitor.  But that adage is wrong when we are talking about DISCHARGING a coil or capacitor.  A capacitor can only discharge if it has a voltage high enough to overcome whatever resistance is in the circuit.  So voltage leads current when discharging a capacitor.  And when voltage is removed from a coil the current in the coil tries to maintain itself so it will build a voltage high enough to overcome the resistance in the circuit and thus discharge the current in the coil.  So current LEADS voltage when a coil is discharging.

So what happens when a magnet is moving past a coil?  The coil will have a voltage induced into it whether there is a load connected to the coil or not.  This can easily be seen by just connecting a scope to the open leads of a coil and seeing the voltage on the scope just like the video Nix posted.  When a load is connected to a coil and the magnet passes the coil the coil is being both charged and discharged at the same time because the voltage is being induced into the coil from an external source and not being applied directly to the coil.  That is the difference.  When this happens the voltage and any current being used are in phase.  Again this can be proven by connecting a scope across the leads of the coil and across the load.  The scope leads across the load will be measuring the voltage drop across the load and hence the current through the load.  If the load is a resistive load then the voltage and current will be in phase just as Verpies has said.  i am in the process of uploading a video that shows this.  I will post a link when it finishes uploading.

Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 05:28:24 PM
Quote
The problem with some of the people on these type of forums is they get some knowledge from YouTube or elsewhere and think they know more than those of us that have worked in electronics for years.

The problem with these people who think just because they been in electronics for years they got real understanding of it.

Quote
Most anyone that has studied electronics for even a little while has heard the expression "Eli the Iceman".  And they have been taught that means that voltage leads current in an inductor and current leads voltage in a capacitor.  That adage of course is true if we are talking about CHARGING a coil or capacitor.  But that adage is wrong when we are talking about DISCHARGING a coil or capacitor.  A capacitor can only discharge if it has a voltage high enough to overcome whatever resistance is in the circuit.  So voltage leads current when discharging a capacitor.  And when voltage is removed from a coil the current in the coil tries to maintain itself so it will build a voltage high enough to overcome the resistance in the circuit and thus discharge the current in the coil.  So current LEADS voltage when a coil is discharging.

I agree that lag changes on discharge but his claim is that they are in-phase.

Quote
......When a load is connected to a coil and the magnet passes the coil the coil is being both charged and discharged at the same time because the voltage is being induced into the coil from an external source and not being applied directly to the coil.

Not applied directly to coil?? Is he kidding? Coil is part of the circuit, it has copper losses etc.

Quote
That is the difference.  When this happens the voltage and any current being used are in phase.

It depends on the load, just like in transformer plugged into wall 24/7, reactive power passes through it all the time, if we connect a small load to it, v-i phase shift will fall from 89° to say 85°, but with bigger load it may get to 0 and coil becomes purely resistive.

Quote
Again this can be proven by connecting a scope across the leads of the coil and across the load.  The scope leads across the load will be measuring the voltage drop across the load and hence the current through the load.  If the load is a resistive load then the voltage and current will be in phase just as Verpies has said.  i am in the process of uploading a video that shows this.  I will post a link when it finishes uploading.

LOL, that's what i been saying for 4 pages already. Resistance brings i-v into phase, but he claims they can be in phase in purely inductive circuit WITHOUT resistance.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 09, 2020, 05:40:51 PM
Video link:

https://vimeo.com/466592675

Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 05:43:27 PM
Ha, that video, current through a resistor + resistance of the coil itself. What a mockery.

Once again.. he claims they can be in phase in purely inductive circuit WITHOUT resistance.

To at least approach these conditions with resistive wire, one has to use the method i gave above.

1. Separate coil to measure voltage.

2. Measure current with clamp probe.

3. AT LEAST 50 turns of thick wire.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 09, 2020, 05:44:43 PM

It depends on the load, just like in transformer plugged into wall 24/7, reactive power passes through it all the time, if we connect a small load to it, v-i phase shift will fall from 89° to say 85°, but with bigger load it may get to 0 and coil becomes purely resistive.

That is just not true.  I tried the same set up with several different loads and the current and voltage were always in phase.  Now YOU show us something that proves us wrong.

Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 05:54:39 PM

That is just not true.  I tried the same set up with several different loads and the current and voltage were always in phase.  Now YOU show us something that proves us wrong.

Carroll

Which means you got too much resistance and capacitance in the circuit and you have proved nothing. Also you used way too low speed, inductive reactance is XL= 2πfL.

Let's bring in someone whom you deem an authority as proposed, let's hear his opinion if current lags voltage in purely inductive circuit when induction is done by moving magnet.

How bout Thane Heins, is he a member here?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 09, 2020, 06:01:47 PM
So what happens when a magnet is moving past a coil?  The coil will have a voltage induced into it whether there is a load connected to the coil or not. This can easily be seen by just connecting a scope to the open leads of a coil and seeing the voltage on the scope...

Question: Does the scope not represent at least a little bit of load on the coil, and wouldn't using a separate sensing coil similar to that used in the following video be a more accurate test? https://youtu.be/hw2bBYYHp34?t=89 (https://youtu.be/hw2bBYYHp34?t=89)
Thank you.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 09, 2020, 06:11:43 PM
Hi NDZ,

That is a valid question.  But the input impendence of a modern scope is typically several megohms.  And I was using the 10x position on the probe.  So any loading of the coil by the scope is so small as to be almost unmeasurable.

Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 09, 2020, 06:12:45 PM
Hi NDZ,

That is a valid question.  But the input impendence of a modern scope is typically several megohms.  And I was using the 10x position on the probe.  So any loading of the coil by the scope is so small as to be almost unmeasurable.

Carroll

Thank you.
Regards
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 09, 2020, 06:14:40 PM
Which means you got too much resistance and capacitance in the circuit and you have proved nothing. Also you used way too low speed, inductive reactance is XL= 2πfL.

Let's bring in someone whom you deem an authority as proposed, let's hear his opinion if current lags voltage in purely inductive circuit when induction is done by moving magnet.

How bout Thane Heins, is he a member here?

You are the one making the claim.  I asked you to back up your claim and now you want someone else to bail you out.  Show us the proof you are correct!

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 09, 2020, 06:19:54 PM
NX
We can always bother Thane

However this seems more mainstream ?

Would be good to get moderators from EE or Physics Forum

However there are some builds to discuss here?

Perhaps a quicker route

I am absolutely going to be connecting with
EE and Physics Moderators

Good to have such on standby

May take until next week
Open Source community has many such
Members
However I have never participated in the venues
“ they “ frequent

Asking for help to get this done!

Could be A regular feature perhaps to bounce weird observations off?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 06:22:58 PM

You are the one making the claim.  I asked you to back up your claim and now you want someone else to bail you out.  Show us the proof you are correct!

No, your friend is making a claim which deviates from common understanding, proof is on him/you.

In the midtime, observe the phase shift without and with load in ordinary and bi transformer

By Heins

youtube.com/watch?v=4_zgR5fyF30
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 09, 2020, 06:23:37 PM
Nix,

This test was done using an air core coil arrangement that has L1 ~100 turn for the voltage sense coil with L2 ~20 turns wound directly on top of L1 resulting in a rather tight coupling of k~.95 or so.  A ceramic PM was moved by hand past the coil assembly with the resulting traces sampled on a Tek MDO using a Tek TCP0020 current probe for the current sense.

Ch1(yel) shows the voltage across L1 and CH4(grn) shows the current through L2 shorted.  It is obvious that the voltage and current are in-phase.

I would attach a pix of the test coil but my camera at the moment is dead but will supply a pix later if needed.

If you would like any changes made to this simple test, let me know as I can wind any configuration you would request apart from an SC coil.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 09, 2020, 06:24:34 PM

NX85

Is this from challenge here
https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869 (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869)

Post 45
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 09, 2020, 06:36:31 PM
No, your friend is making a claim which deviates from common understanding, proof is on him/you.

In the midtime, observe the phase shift without and with load in ordinary and bi transformer

By Heins

youtube.com/watch?v=4_zgR5fyF30

Your link is not working.  But it appears you are trying to change the subject again.  We are NOT talking about transformers.  We ARE talking about a magnet inducing voltage and current in a coil.  And the picture just posted by partzman also confirms the voltage and current are in phase in a generating coil.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 06:41:46 PM
You mixed the turns, voltage coil should have little turns, not vice versa.

Also you moved magnet by hand altho inductive reactance is undetectable at such low frequency.

It's funny how you try to prove he's right with resistive coils while doing the test wrongly forgetting he is making a claim for PURELY INDUCTIVE COIL.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 09, 2020, 06:47:06 PM
NX85
Your use of word “Friends “
Is silly
Implying nonsense

Better to stick to Brutal honesty

There are no “Friends “ when it comes
To truth

Just prove the point on your bench
Or accept a bench you will aprove for test !

And set criteria

You are fortunate to be amongst brutal honesty
Not “friends “
Regardless the outcome

The truth matters
And will rule the day !!

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 07:06:46 PM
NX85
Your use of word “Friends “
Is silly
Implying nonsense

Better to stick to Brutal honesty

There are no “Friends “ when it comes
To truth

Just prove the point on your bench
Or accept a bench you will except for test

And set criteria

You are fortunate to be amongst brutal honesty
Not “friends “
Regardless the outcome

The truth matters
And will rule the day !!

It's not silly, there is a clear desire here to prove him right, call it friends or whatever.

Only truth matters, that i agree.

Just don't forget his claim is for pure inductive coil.

Here is one bench test showing clear 90° IV phase shift with aircores.

From description

"In this configuration the little flat coil with negligible inductance read only voltage and detect the position of magnets, the other coils are closed in loop and read the current across one shunt resistor of 10 Ohm. "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6AOTQlHhTU&
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 07:34:49 PM
That is relative thing since all physical laws can be skewed or bypassed in certain ways but within certain limits they hold true, see below for an example.
I am all for designing a good experiment that will not skew or obscure the phenomenon being studied.

Your belief.
You are right to call it a belief or a hypothesis or a conjecture until I proove or disproove it according to the scientific method e.g. with falisifibility and replicatibility.

Ohm's law has it's exceptions, incandescent bulb totally ignores Ohm's law, as filament gets hotter it's resistance increases and Ohm's law is out of window,
Not really, it is just a badly designed experiment, namely two disparate measurements of the filament in two very different physical conditions.
If the resistance measurement of a hot filament is made then the Ohm's Law holds.

Show me a near purely inductive circuit in which current does not lag voltage as magnet passes across the coil and i'll be happy to admit this law is bypassed in such case.
OK, but as you have just illustrated, a badly designed experiment will yield bad results, so we will have to design a good experiment to which we both agree.

PS. since you will using resistive coil to prove something about ideal coils, use as thick wire as possible and at least 50 turns.
I could use a NbTi coil but the dewar will obscure its view and the LH is is expensive and will break the clamp-on current probe for oscilloscope.

To do it right you should use two coils, one for voltage and another for current, measure current with a clamp probe for oscilloscope.
That is doable with two identical low-resistance coils and two identical magnets, but the coil for measuring induced voltage should not be in close proximity to the shorted coil used for measuring current because the latter may distort the permanent magnet's flux which reaches inside the former coil.

IMO it is important, that the two coils and magnets are identical to prevent any differences in their behavior. This should be verifiable by swapping their roles at any time.
Also, I think that when both coils are opened and used for induced voltage measurement, then both voltage waveforms generated by them, should be identical and appear in-phase on the scope. Two out-of-phase induced voltage waveforms would indicate misalignment and would necessitate calibration of the apparatus.

Do you think that a result of such experiment would constitute an objective proof or disproof of the 1 BTC challange (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869) ?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 09, 2020, 07:38:26 PM

NX85 (sorry I posted while Verpies was commenting)Well actually
I beg to differ

It seems your impression is not accurate

I have heard from both sides
And it seems a very good discussion to have

Please do not think any here would be disengenuos
Or dishonest to support an associate (we who hunt FE are all associates)

Science has no friends and should have no agenda other than the truth

Please move forward
Is the post #45 here the issue of contention?

Respectfully
Chet
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 07:45:56 PM
Not really, it is just a badly designed experiment, namely two disparate measurements of the filament in two very different physical conditions.
If the resistance measurement of a hot filament is made then the Ohm's Law holds.

Wow, you must be a genius. Totally blew my mind. :)

It was just an example how law can be perceived as violated when it really was not.

As usual, you missed the point.

Quote
OK, but as you have just illustrated, a badly designed experiment will yield bad results, so we will have to design a good experiment to which we both agree.By turning on a very small (mW) heater, you can locally heat the superconducting loop so it becomes resistive. Now you can apply a voltage to the circuit - and it will preferentially send current around the superconducting part of the loop. The current will not be infinite though - for a given inductance L, the magnet will "ramp" as the current increases according to
V=−LdIdt

What i referred to was not an experiment.

Quote
I could use a NbTi coil but the dewar will obscure its view and the LH is is expensive and will break the clamp-on current probe for oscilloscope.

That is doable with two identical low-resistance coils and two identical magnets, but the coil for measuring induced voltage should not be in close proximity to the shorted coil used for measuring current because the latter may distort the permanent magnet's flux which reaches inside the former coil.

IMO it is important, that the two coils and magnets are identical to prevent any differences in their behavior. This should be verifiable by swapping their roles at any time.
Also, I think that when both coils are opened and used for induced voltage measurement, then both voltage waveforms generated by them, should be identical and appear in-phase on the scope. Two out-of-phase induced voltage waveforms would indicate misalignment and would necessitate calibration of the apparatus.

Do you think that a result of such experiment would constitute an objective proof or disproof of the 1 BTC challange ?

I just linked to a video of perfect 90° phase shift in closed aircore coil.

You claim coil without resistance would have 0 phase shift.

I leave it to you to prove your claim in objective, scientific manner.

This guy put it nicely...

"In a superconductor, the current can keep flowing "forever" since there is no resistance. But since conductors have inductance (in fact, superconductors are used most often to create magnets like for an MRI scanner), applying a voltage would not (immediately) cause an infinite current to flow.

By turning on a very small (mW) heater, you can locally heat the superconducting loop so it becomes resistive. Now you can apply a voltage to the circuit - and it will preferentially send current around the superconducting part of the loop. The current will not be infinite though - for a given inductance L, the magnet will "ramp" as the current increases according to V=−LdI/dt"

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/179374/is-current-in-superconductors-infinite-if-they-have-0-resistance-then-i-v-r-s
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 08:04:07 PM
Video link:
https://vimeo.com/466592675 (https://vimeo.com/466592675)
Thank you for doing that experiment, but I am afraid that it will not put this dispute to bed.

This is because this experiment was designed according to your ideas and not nix85's.  The rules of science say that both parties must agree to the experimental conditions.

1) We both don't like ferromagnetic cores in the coils, because ferromagnetism is a very complex secondary phenomenon and we are trying to avoid such confounding factors.

2) Nix85 wants to use 2 coils. One for measuring current and one for measuring voltage. While I don't think two coils are necessary to prove/disprove the issue at hand, I want to accommodate him ...and since two identical coils will not skew the experiment,  I agree to them.

3) I think the voltage signals form the two open coils should be identical and in-phase for the purpose of the calibration of the apparatus and the coils cannot be in close proximity ...and in your apparatus this means two identical coils placed diametrically opposite around the flywheel and two identical magnets (with identical poles sticking out) placed diametrically opposite on the flywheel.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 09, 2020, 08:33:21 PM
You mixed the turns, voltage coil should have little turns, not vice versa.

Also you moved magnet by hand altho inductive reactance is undetectable at such low frequency.

It's funny how you try to prove he's right with resistive coils while doing the test wrongly forgetting he is making a claim for PURELY INDUCTIVE COIL.

Nix,

This test has L1 and L2 reversed.  IOW, L1 is now the current sense winding and L2 is the voltage sense winding.  The inductance of L1 is 143uH and the DCR is .38 ohms.  L1 is wound with 100 turns as stated before and is wound with 15-34 litz wire as is L2.

As one can see, the voltage and current are still in-phase.

How pure an inductive coil do you desire?  How about giving a desired L/R ratio?  IOW, at what point do we begin to see a phase shift towards 90 degrees current lag?

I am not favoring anyone here, I am interested in the science.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 08:39:29 PM
Nix,

This test has L1 and L2 reversed.  IOW, L1 is now the current sense winding and L2 is the voltage sense winding.  The inductance of L1 is 143uH and the DCR is .38 ohms.  L1 is wound with 100 turns as stated before and is wound with 15-34 litz wire as is L2.

As one can see, the voltage and current are still in-phase.

How pure an inductive coil do you desire?  How about giving a desired L/R ratio?  IOW, at what point do we begin to see a phase shift towards 90 degrees current lag?

I am not favoring anyone here, I am interested in the science.

Regards,
Pm

Look at the vid i linked.

Makes you wonder if phase shift is 90° when he barely pushed it with hand, how much would it be at 1000 or 2000 rpm.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 09, 2020, 09:27:21 PM
Look at the vid i linked.

Makes you wonder if phase shift is 90° when he barely pushed it with hand, how much would it be at 1000 or 2000 rpm.

Nix,

Are you sure you and the author of this video have interpreted the results correctly?  Here we see three coils spaced the same distance apart as the PMs in the rotor.  However, the first two coils relative to the rotational direction of the rotor, have their axis at 90 degrees to the PM axis while the third coil with the voltage sense coil have their axis in line with the PM axis.  Aren't we apples to oranges here?  The current phase in the first two coils at 90 degrees off-axis will be different that the third on-axis coil.

Also notice the screenshot taken below that is early in the test, shows the current waveform more symmetrical around zero as compared to the shot you choose to use in the later part of the video.  In the screen shot below, the phase is not even close to 90 degrees but appears from dimensional measurement to be more like 56 degrees.

In the scope pix you show taken at the later time in the video, the current waveform has shifted considerably upwards off center and does appear to be closer to 90 degrees.

Also, you criticized my frequency using the hand passed PM but this test has a half period of ~15ms where with my test the same half period is ~17ms!?

IMO, this video does nothing to confirm your position.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 09:37:20 PM
Nix,

Are you sure you and the author of this video have interpreted the results correctly?  Here we see three coils spaced the same distance apart as the PMs in the rotor.  However, the first two coils relative to the rotational direction of the rotor, have their axis at 90 degrees to the PM axis while the third coil with the voltage sense coil have their axis in line with the PM axis.  Aren't we apples to oranges here?  The current phase in the first two coils at 90 degrees off-axis will be different that the third on-axis coil.

I noticed first coil is at 90° and i attribute the votage ripple to it. Not an issue.

Quote
Also notice the screenshot taken below that is early in the test, shows the current waveform more symmetrical around zero as compared to the shot you choose to use in the later part of the video.  In the screen shot below, the phase is not even close to 90 degrees but appears from dimensional measurement to be more like 56 degrees.

In the scope pix you show taken at the later time in the video, the current waveform has shifted considerably upwards off center and does appear to be closer to 90 degrees.

56? Are you kidding? In your screenshot current is barely above 0 when voltage is max, this is near perfect 90°.

Quote
Also, you criticized my frequency using the hand passed PM but this test has a half period of ~15ms where with my test the same half period is ~17ms!?

Already addressed that, i ascribe it to many more turns than you used.

Quote
IMO, this video does nothing to confirm your position.

Regards,
Pm

So, you're a joker. Good one.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 09:41:16 PM
In fact, it is not near perfect, it IS perfect 90° offset.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 09:51:15 PM
Resistance brings i-v into phase, but he claims they can be in phase in purely inductive circuit WITHOUT resistance.
Once again.. he claims they can be in phase in purely inductive circuit WITHOUT resistance.
Yes, that is what I claim when the inductor is energized magnetically.
Also, I claim that this is true in inductive circuits WITH resistance when they are energized magnetically.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 09, 2020, 09:53:50 PM
Nix,

When you look and compare the rising edge of the voltage waveform in red, as compared to the rising edge of the current waveform in yellow as compared to the overall current period that is yellow-yellow, the phase is about what I stated, not 90 degrees.  You are comparing the aberration in the voltage waveform to the peak in the current waveform which is not truly accurate.

Regards,
Pm

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 10:00:35 PM
To at least approach these conditions with resistive wire, one has to use the method i gave above.
1. Separate coil to measure voltage.
2. Measure current with clamp probe.
3. AT LEAST 50 turns of thick wire.
I agree with these experimental conditions and add that:
a) the "open voltage coil" must not be in close proximity to the "closed current coil" because the latter distorts the flux from the magnet passing through the former.
b) the coils must be identical so no objections can be raised based on their differences.
c) the apparatus must be calibrated in such manner, that when both coils are open, then the voltage signals generated by them are identical and in-phase.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 10:02:11 PM
Abberation is half in + and half in -, thus it is perfectly usable.

But let's look at your marks. Indigo lines mark 90° from red lines.

56° would be just bit to the right from the middle.

Where are the yellow lines. 75-80°.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 10:05:46 PM
Question: Does the scope not represent at least a little bit of load on the coil, and wouldn't using a separate sensing coil similar to that used in the following video be a more accurate test? https://youtu.be/hw2bBYYHp34?t=89 (https://youtu.be/hw2bBYYHp34?t=89)
Thank you.
No and Citfta's answer is correct.

This is because the impedance of the scope probe is so high that it is negligible at frequencies occurring in these mechanical machine Hz or kHz at most.
However if you were dealing with MHz frequencies or higher then the impedance of a typical scope probe would NOT be negligible anymore.  That's why in such scenarios active FET probes are preferred - they have an even higher impedance than passive scope probes.

...wouldn't using a separate sensing coil similar to that used in the following video be a more accurate test
Using separate coils for sensing the voltage and current is not more accurate and in my opinion it is not even necessary to resolve this issue, but it is cleaner conceptually and it is more difficult to object to the result of an experiment that uses separate coils for sensing induced voltage and induced current ...and since it does not skew the experiment much when identical coils are used, I just agree to it.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 10:23:03 PM
In the midtime, observe the phase shift without and with load in ordinary and bi transformer By Heins
youtube.com/watch?v=4_zgR5fyF30
Experiments involving transformers are not relevant to the issue at hand because transformers do not use single purely inductive circuits nor single RL circuits. They involve multiple RL circuits that are coupled magnetically.

The comparison of
the phase between the externally applied input voltage and the output current of a transformer,
is not the same as,
the phase between magnetically induced voltage and magnetically induced current in a single inductive circuit.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 09, 2020, 10:23:44 PM
Nix,

Here is the source of the phase shift in the video you referenced.

A first test was made with a large coil for current sense with a flat voltage sense coil in parallel as in the test video.  This can be seen in the first pix.  A ceramic PM was passed in front of this assembly with the PM axis on axis with the coil assembly.  In the following scope pix we again see no phase shift.  CH1(yel) is the voltage and CH4(grn) is the current.

A second test was made with the same coils only now the current sensing coil was positioned at 90 degrees to the voltage sensing coil and the PM axis as seen in the third pix.  The PM was again hand passed in the same relative position as before and the 4th pix shows the resulting waveforms.  Here we see the source of the of the current lag in the video when one considers the positioning and timing of the PMs on the rotor to the coils.

This video therefore is no proof of your position IMO.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 10:26:57 PM
Experiments involving transformers are not relevant to the issue at hand because transformers do not use single purely inductive circuits nor single RL circuits. They involve multiple RL circuits that are coupled magnetically.

The comparison of
the phase between the externally applied input voltage and the output current of a transformer,
is not the same as,
the phase between magnetically induced voltage and magnetically induced current in a single inductive circuit.

I did not post it as argument for anything, just as interesting video, curb your horses.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 10:32:18 PM
Nix,

Here is the source of the phase shift in the video you referenced.

A first test was made with a large coil for current sense with a flat voltage sense coil in parallel as in the test video.  This can be seen in the first pix.  A ceramic PM was passed in front of this assembly with the PM axis on axis with the coil assembly.  In the following scope pix we again see no phase shift.  CH1(yel) is the voltage and CH4(grn) is the current.

A second test was made with the same coils only now the current sensing coil was positioned at 90 degrees to the voltage sensing coil and the PM axis as seen in the third pix.  The PM was again hand passed in the same relative position as before and the 4th pix shows the resulting waveforms.  Here we see the source of the of the current lag in the video when one considers the positioning and timing of the PMs on the rotor to the coils.

This video therefore is no proof of your position IMO.

Regards,
Pm

Let's suppose you are about this video, but it does nothing to disprove the effect itself, it does not debunk Heins' delayed lenz coils.

It does not disprove the fact that higher in frequency you get inductors become more and more reactive. Etc.

90° shift is possible.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 09, 2020, 10:39:28 PM
No and Citfta's answer is correct.

This is because the impedance of the scope probe is so high that it is negligible at frequencies occurring in these mechanical machine Hz or kHz at most.
However if you were dealing with MHz frequencies or higher then the impedance of a typical scope probe would NOT be negligible anymore.  That's why in such scenarios active FET probes are preferred - they have an even higher impedance than passive scope probes.
Using separate coils for sensing the voltage and current is not more accurate and in my opinion it is not even necessary to resolve this issue, but it is cleaner conceptually and it is more difficult to object to the result of an experiment that uses separate coils for sensing induced voltage and induced current ...and since it does not skew the experiment much when identical coils are used, I just agree to it.

Thank you for the reply.
Question: If using a sensing coil/s, would the current/voltage measured be that produced/induced in the sensing coil/s? I'm not sure if I'm asking this question correctly. For example, in a step-down transformer the secondary would have lower voltage/higher current. I'm wondering if using a sensing coil of say lesser turns than the coil you want to measure wouldn't cause some skewed results due to a change in voltage/current. I suspect that it would not make any difference in regards to phase. Thank you.
Regards
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 10:46:53 PM
Which means you got too much resistance and capacitance in the circuit and you have proved nothing. Also you used way too low speed,
@ Citfta
You have not plugged all the "holes" in your experiment and now they are being used to undermine its validity.

inductive reactance is XL= 2πfL.
@nix85
True, but only in reference to external sinusoidal AC voltage applied to an inductor (of magnitude Vrms).
In such scenario, the rms of AC current (redundant) flowing through this inductor is irms = Vrms / 2πfL  ...and for a square AC voltage applied to that inductor that current is  irms = πVrms/ 16fL.

However, the above is not true in case of applying an external alternating flux through that inductor.
Are you able to provide a formula for the alleged phase difference (θ) between the induced voltage and induced current in an inductor that is subjected to a sinusoidally varying external magnetic flux ?

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 10:54:21 PM
Quote
However, the above is not true in case of applying an external alternating flux through that inductor.

So now you are not claiming only for ideal coil but for all coils over which external flux changes.

Do you realize Heins' delayed lenz motor works only due to the fact that reality is opposite to what you claim. Yea, i believe he uses cores, but nonetheless.

Also did you see the quote above about superconductors, do you see it is common knowledge inductance plays the same role as in resistive coils.. delaying current.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 11:11:35 PM
Nix,
This test was done using an air core coil arrangement that has L1 ~100 turn for the voltage sense coil with L2 ~20 turns wound directly on top of L1 resulting in a rather tight coupling of k~.95 or so.  A ceramic PM was moved by hand past the coil assembly with the resulting traces sampled on a Tek MDO using a Tek TCP0020 current probe for the current sense.

Ch1(yel) shows the voltage across L1 and CH4(grn) shows the current through L2 shorted.  It is obvious that the voltage and current are in-phase.
Thank you for performing this experiment but unfortunately you did not keep it clean enough and I suspect that now Nix will try to punch holes in it. He is entitled to do so, BTW.
Most likely he will object to:
- The period of the magnet's motion is too long compared the the L/R time constant of the inductive circuit.
- the speed is not controlled precisely enough. Is not uniform.
- the coils are not identical (this would also be an objection from me) or have the wrong number of turns.

...and finally my objection: The coils are in too close proximity. This allows the shorted coil to influence the flux penetrating the open coil used to sense the voltage.  As you probably know, a shorted coil opposes the flux which attempts to penetrate it. It pushes the change of the flux out of itself.

[/font]
If you would like any changes made to this simple test, let me know as I can wind any configuration you would request apart from an SC coil.
In My Opinion this would do:
1) Attach two identical magnets on the perimeter of a bicycle wheel, diametrically oppositely.
2) Place two identical air core coils around the wheel diametrically oppositely.
3) Open both coils and precisely calibrate their position such that their induced voltage signals are identical and in phase.
4) Close one coil and prepare it for current measurement.
5) The bicycle wheel can be spun by hand but the i&v measurement must be made only when it is spinning down by itself (by its moment of inertia).
6) Repeat the experiment with the roles of the coils reversed, i.e. close the voltage sensing coil and open the current sensing coil.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 11:16:17 PM
Your link is not working.  But it appears you are trying to change the subject again.  We are NOT talking about transformers.  We ARE talking about a magnet inducing voltage and current in a coil.
Yes, transformers are at least 2 magnetically coupled inductive circuits and we are talking about about a magnet inducing voltage and current in a single inductive circuit.
This transformers are a different subject.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 11:22:31 PM
It's funny how you try to prove he's right with resistive coils while doing the test wrongly forgetting he is making a claim for PURELY INDUCTIVE COIL.
I never narrowed it down to purely inductive coils only, although I claim this for purely inductive coils as well. Just read the text of my 1 BTC challenge (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869).
I do however narrow down the lack of delay between the induced voltage and induced current to coils which are energized magnetically - not electrically !

@ Partzman
I do not want you to make experiments which are designed to prove my point.  Only the truth.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 11:33:09 PM
I do however narrow down the lack of delay between the induced voltage and induced current to coils which are energized magnetically - not electrically !

Already addressed this above, if you were right Heins' motor could not work.

Also what they say about sc at stackexchange.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 09, 2020, 11:50:55 PM
Here is one bench test showing clear 90° IV phase shift with aircores.
From description
"In this configuration the little flat coil with negligible inductance read only voltage and detect the position of magnets, the other coils are closed in loop and read the current across one shunt resistor of 10 Ohm. "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6AOTQlHhTU& (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6AOTQlHhTU&)
This experiment is very flawed because:
1) It is comparing voltage induced in one coil to current induced in 3 other coils connected in series .
2) Not only the number of coils is different but their number of turns in the two sets of coils is wildly different, too.
3) Some coils are oriented differently with respect to the diameter of the rotor.
4) It is not proven that the magnets influence all coils equally and at the same time, because ...see pt.5
5) There is no calibration run performed, which demonstrate that when the two sets of coils are open then the voltage waveform induced in them is identical and in-phase.
6) The coils are in too close proximity to each other so the coils shorted by the current sensing resistor (CSR) can influence the flux attempting to penetrate the open coil which is used to sense the induced voltage.  View this simulation (https://youtu.be/wUaqXk6axOo) to see how a low-resistance coil distorts the varying magnetic flux in its vicinity.  The coil in this simulation (https://youtu.be/wUaqXk6axOo) is not superconductive but in this one (https://youtu.be/bHVvMFVIaFY) it is.

Because of these reasons this experiment is not conclusive.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 09, 2020, 11:52:32 PM
I never narrowed it down to purely inductive coils only, although I claim this for purely inductive coils as well. Just read the text of my 1 BTC challenge (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869).
I do however narrow down the lack of delay between the induced voltage and induced current to coils which are energized magnetically - not electrically !

@ Partzman
I do not want you to make experiments which are designed to prove my point.  Only the truth.

Verpies,

I have tried to be as objective as possible with my testing and will take your build suggestions into consideration.  At the moment however, I have a relative who recently fell and broke a hip, had surgery done, and now appears to have had a stroke.  I may not be able to continue with this thread for awhile.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 09, 2020, 11:53:21 PM
Reply to my last posts about Heins and sc at stackexchange.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 12:17:49 AM
Wow, you must be a genius. Totally blew my mind. :)
Glad to know

It was just an example how law can be perceived as violated when it really was not.
Yup, that is why experiments must be designed cleanly to avoid confounding factors.

As usual, you missed the point.
What i referred to was not an experiment.
An empirical measurement proving an expected result, such an Ohm's law, is an experiment, even if it is a small and simple one.

I just linked to a video of perfect 90° phase shift in closed aircore coil.
You claim coil without resistance would have 0 phase shift.
I leave it to you to prove your claim in objective, scientific manner.
I just posted 7 objections (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551955/#msg551955) to this experiment.
Because of them it cannot be used to draw valid conclusions about the issue at hand.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/179374/is-current-in-superconductors-infinite-if-they-have-0-resistance-then-i-v-r-s (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/179374/is-current-in-superconductors-infinite-if-they-have-0-resistance-then-i-v-r-s)
This guy put it nicely...

"In a superconductor, the current can keep flowing "forever" since there is no resistance. But since conductors have inductance (in fact, superconductors are used most often to create magnets like for an MRI scanner), applying a voltage would not (immediately) cause an infinite current to flow".
I agree and this is a scenario in which an external voltage source is applied to an inductive circuit. In other words, the inductor is energized by electric means.

"By turning on a very small (mW) heater, you can locally heat the superconducting loop so it becomes resistive. Now you can apply a voltage to the circuit - and it will preferentially send current around the superconducting part of the loop. The current will not be infinite though - for a given inductance L, the magnet will "ramp" as the current increases according to V=−LdI/dt"
I agree and even have done that feat, but this still is a scenario of the inductor being energized by electric means.

There is second way to energize a shorted superconducting coil. Namely it can be done by magnetic means like this:
1) Insert a permanent magnet into the bore of a coil made out of a an type2 alloy that becomes superconductive when cooled below its critical temperature, when the alloy is hot and not superconductive.
2) The bore is penetrated by the flux of the permanent magnet.
3) The current in the coil is zero
4) Cool that coil below its critical temperature (the coil becomes a superconductor)
5) The permanent magnet's flux penetrating the bore of the sc coil remains constant. It is not expelled as some noobs think.
6) The current in the sc coil is still zero because the flux penetrating it has not changed.
7) Remove the permanent magnet from the bore of the coil. This requires work. Attraction force over distance.
8 ) The sc coil senses the attempted change of flux and generates its own flux that keeps the flux in the bore constant. An ideal shorted coil is a perfect flux clamp.
9) It performs the feat in pt.8 by inducing a current in its winding which generates that flux of the coil.
10) That current circulates "forever" as long as the permanent magnet is kept away from the sc coil.

The current induced in the sc coil appears as fast as you can remove that permanent magnet.  There is no delay.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 12:27:19 AM
This test has L1 and L2 reversed.  IOW, L1 is now the current sense winding and L2 is the voltage sense winding.  The inductance of L1 is 143uH and the DCR is .38 ohms.  L1 is wound with 100 turns as stated before and is wound with 15-34 litz wire as is L2.

As one can see, the voltage and current are still in-phase.
So you just neutralized Nix's objection that the number of turns was not like he wanted.
If you want to keep it clean and robust in the future - keep the number of turns the same.

How pure an inductive coil do you desire?  How about giving a desired L/R ratio?
Good question.

However the issue at hand (described in the 1 BTC challenge (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869)) was never restricted to purely inductive circuits, although it includes them, too.
That issue is restricted however, to the energization of the inductive circuit by magnetic means only - not electric means, such as applying energy to it from an external constant voltage PS.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 12:34:51 AM
bla bla
An empirical measurement proving an expected result, such an Ohm's law, is an experiment, even if it is a small and simple one.

Experiment in my dictionary means attempt to discover something, working with well known phenomena such as Ohm's law is a routine procedure.

Quote
I just posted 7 objections to this experiment.
Because of them it cannot be used to draw valid conclusions about the issue at hand.

You are referring to already "debunked" video.

Quote
I agree and this is a scenario in which an external voltage source is applied to an inductive circuit. In other words, the inductor is energized by electric means.
I agree and even have done that feat, but this still is a scenario of the inductor being energized by electric means.

There is second way to energize a shorted superconducting coil. Namely it can be done by magnetic means like this:
1) Insert a permanent magnet into the bore of a coil made out of a an type2 alloy that becomes superconductive when cooled below its critical temperature, when the alloy is hot and not superconductive.
2) The bore is penetrated by the flux of the permanent magnet.
3) The current in the coil is zero
4) Cool that coil below its critical temperature (the coil becomes a superconductor)
5) The permanent magnet's flux penetrating the bore of the sc coil remains constant. It is not expelled as some noobs think.
6) The current in the sc coil is still zero because the flux penetrating it has not changed.
7) Remove the permanent magnet from the bore of the coil. This requires work. Attraction force over distance.
8 ) The sc coil senses the attempted change of flux and generates its own flux that keeps the flux in the bore constant. An ideal shorted coil is a perfect flux clamp.
9) It performs the feat in pt.8 by inducing a current in its winding which generates that flux of the coil.
10) That current circulates "forever" as long as the permanent magnet is kept away from the sc coil.

The current induced in the sc coil appears as fast as you can remove that permanent magnet.  There is no delay.

If you read the second answer on that page you would know it says "The main way current gets started, like in an NMR magnet, is by inductive coupling."

I already quoted the first answer which says current lags voltage due to inductance...

You are going against all of them.. Let's bring in some sc experts here...

Lets see them disperse your fantasies into pixie dust and unicorn farts quicker than Rocky pronounces an intelligible sentence.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 12:39:25 AM
Look at the vid i linked.

I just posted 7 objections (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551955/#msg551955) to this experiment.
Because of them it cannot be used to draw valid conclusions about the issue at hand.

I am repeating this for the sake of members that might not want to read this thread successively/sequentially.

Makes you wonder if phase shift is 90° when he barely pushed it with hand, how much would it be at 1000 or 2000 rpm.
Remember my claim, that there is no phase shift between the induced voltage and induced current in an inductor, which is subjected to external variable flux
...AND that it stays this way regardless of the speed of the flux variations. IOW: it is the same regardless of the speed of the magnet on the rotor.

Also, I claim that the magnitude of the current induced in an ideal shorted coil, does NOT depend on the speed of the flux variations it is subjected to.
IOW: The induced flux does not depend on the speed of the permanent magnet being swept across the shorted ideal coil (or being removed from this coil, or inserted into that coil).
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 12:47:01 AM
You are comparing the aberration in the voltage waveform to the peak in the current waveform which is not truly accurate.
I agree and I missed it in the list of my objections to this experiment.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:05:06 AM
So now you are not claiming only for ideal coil but for all coils over which external flux changes.
Yes, I never excluded LR circuits from this (see the text of my 1 BTC challenge (https://overunity.com/18653/ac-voltage-from-single-magnetic-pole/msg551869/#msg551869)) and I also include shorted ideal coils in that claim.
Could you remind me where I have written about that restriction to ideal coils only ?

Do you realize Heins' delayed lenz motor works only due to the fact that reality is opposite to what you claim. Yea, i believe he uses cores, but nonetheless.
I am not familiar with the Heins' delayed lenz motor. I don't even know whether it works or not.
However when I read "motor" that makes me think that the coils of that motor are energized by electric means.  If they are energized in that manner then I would expect there to be a delay between the application of external voltage to the coils of this motor and the current which develops as a result of this application.

Also did you see the quote above about superconductors, do you see it is common knowledge inductance plays the same role as in resistive coils.. delaying current.
Yes, inductance delays the current that develops as a consequence of applying an external voltage to an inductor.
But that delay does not occur when that current is induced by a varying external magnetic flux.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:10:20 AM
Already addressed this above, if you were right Heins' motor could not work.
I did too, just in the previous post.
I am replying to the messages of this thread sequentially without reading ahead.

Also what they say about sc at stackexchange.
Please post a link and a pointer to the message which you find noteworthy and I will read it and comment on it.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:12:46 AM
Verpies,

I have tried to be as objective as possible with my testing and will take your build suggestions into consideration.  At the moment however, I have a relative who recently fell and broke a hip, had surgery done, and now appears to have had a stroke.  I may not be able to continue with this thread for awhile.
Sorry to read that. Is it an ischemic stroke ?

This thread will be fine without your input for a while. There are other experimenters that join in.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 01:13:12 AM
Quote
I am not familiar with the Heins' delayed lenz motor. I don't even know whether it works or not.
However when I read "motor" that makes me think that the coils of that motor are energized by electric means.  If they are energized in that manner then I would expect there to be a delay between the application of external voltage to the coils of this motor and the current which develops as a result of this application.

You are making a distinction between electromagnet and PM as if there is any difference in their fields.

Quote
Yes, inductance delays the current that develops as a consequence of applying an external voltage to an inductor.
But that delay does not occur when that current is induced by a varying external magnetic flux.

I'd like to hear a sc expert on this.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:14:48 AM
Reply to my last posts about Heins and sc at stackexchange.
Did I do it already or missed something?

I am replying to the messages on this thread chronologically and sequentially. I am a little behind and I do not read ahead.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 01:20:15 AM
No, you didn't miss anything.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:28:03 AM
Experiment in my dictionary means attempt to discover something, working with well known phenomena such as Ohm's law is a routine procedure.

In my Merriam-Webster disctionary it also means to:
Quote from: Meriam-Webster
EXPERIMENT:
an operation or procedure carried out under controlled conditions in order to discover an unknown effect or law, to test or establish a hypothesis, or to illustrate a known law
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/experiment

You are referring to already "debunked" video.
I did not know.
I reply chronologically and sequentially and I do not read ahead.

If you read the second answer on that page you would know it says
"The main way current gets started, like in an NMR magnet, is by inductive coupling."
I am not disputing the ubiquitness of the procedure. I was just pointing out that there are two ways to energize a superconducting coil:
1) with electric means
2) with magnetic means

Our dispute is that during the energization procedure, the current increases with a delay:
a) In both cases 1 & 2 (which you claim)
b) Only in case 1 (which I claim)

I already quoted the first answer which says current lags voltage due to inductance...
I agree but only in case 1.

You are going against all of them.. Let's bring in some sc experts here...
Lets see them disperse your fantasies into pixie dust and unicorn farts quicker than Rocky pronounces an intelligible sentence.
OK
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 01:28:16 AM
Quote
Yes, inductance delays the current that develops as a consequence of applying an external voltage to an inductor.
But that delay does not occur when that current is induced by a varying external magnetic flux.

Now that we are clear that your claim is for resistive coils too...

An external varying field perfectly includes varying field from an electromagnet, there is no sense to limit it to moving magnet.

And what then, if you insist on aircores, what is the difference between what you claim and a transformer in which core is removed from the secondary. Primary produces time varying flux just like moving PM does, and we got an aircore secondary.

So you are claiming current in this secondary will not lag voltage even when inductance and frequency are high?

That would be completely wrong.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:37:12 AM
You are making a distinction between electromagnet and PM as if there is any difference in their fields.
Fundamentally there is not much difference.
In detail there is a difference between the field of a shorted superconducting solenoid and a cylindrical permanent magnet, because the former attempts to maintain the flux that penetrates it at all costs and does not exhibit BH curve phenomena such as coercivity and remanence.
However I am not using these differences in our discussion.

I'd like to hear a sc expert on this.
Please do.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 01:39:16 AM
Sorry to read that. Is it an ischemic stroke ?

This thread will be fine without your input for a while. There are other experimenters that join in.

Actually we just got the news that he didn't have a stroke a all according to the MRI but since he has epilepsy, they think he had a seizure either during or after the procedure which was a TFNA or TFN-ADVANCED™ Proximal Femoral Nailing System to fix his hip.  If true, then he is exhibiting Todd's Paralysis which mimics a stroke but are only temporary 'normally'.  He had all the classic stroke symptoms like left leg and arm weakness, slurred speech, drooping face, and difficulty swallowing, so we'll know more in the next 24-48 hours or so.

Regards,
Pm

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 01:41:07 AM
I'd like sc expert's opinion, if you got him bring him...

But for now address the last post.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 01:49:57 AM
Now that we are clear that your claim is for resistive coils too...

An external varying field perfectly includes varying field from an electromagnet, there is no sense to limit it to moving magnet.
Yes

And what then, if you insist on aircores, what is the difference between what you claim and a transformer in which core is removed from the secondary.
Primary produces time varying flux just like moving PM does, and we got an aircore secondary.
There is not much difference. The only one I would be worrying about is capacitive coupling at high frequencies between the primary and secondary, such as when one is wound over the other.

So you are claiming current in this secondary will not lag voltage even when inductance and frequency are high?

That question is ambiguous so I will have to add more details to it, like this:

Quote from: Amended Question
So you are claiming current induced in this secondary will not lag the voltage induced in this secondary even when inductance and frequency are high and secondary's self-capacitance is relatively low (or zero) and the only coupling between the primary and secondary is magnetic?
If you ask it like above then my answer is "yes"

Notice, that in such experiment the primary is only a source of varying magnetic flux and there is not access to electric signals in the primary.
This means that you are not allowed to have any knowledge of electric signals in the primary, e.g. you are not allowed to place any electric probes in the primary circuit.

That would be completely wrong.
Why?
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 01:59:31 AM
Why?

For simple reason that current cannot instantly start through any inductor, this is known as

τ = L/R inductor time constant, after ~5τ (transient time) current reaches 99.5%

Therefore inductor with big inductance and low resistance especially at higher frequencies will have significant IV phase shift no matter how you induce it.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 02:03:19 AM
For simple reason that current cannot instantly start through any inductor, this is known as
τ = L/R inductor time constant, after ~5τ (transient time) current reaches 99.5%
Therefore inductor with big inductance and low resistance especially at higher frequencies will have significant IV phase shift.

This is correct but only when that current is a consequence of applying an external voltage to that inductor.
We are not talking about that scenario.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 02:05:55 AM
Quote
This means that you are not allowed to have any knowledge of electric signals in the primary, e.g. you are not allowed to place any electric probes in the primary circuit.

How so, you are feeding the primary AC, you know the signal you feed it.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 02:09:27 AM
How so, you are feeding the primary AC, you know the signal you feed it.
If you acquire the knowledge inadvertently, then you musn't use it in your calculations or conceptual analysis.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 02:11:51 AM
This is correct but only when that current is a consequence of applying an external voltage to that inductor.
We are not talking about that scenario.

What you claim sounds unrealistic, so i'll be happy to find out what is the truth.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 02:13:46 AM
If you acquire the knowledge inadvertently, then you musn't use it in your calculations or conceptual analysis.

What. If you are feeding AC to the primary you know exactly what you are feeding it.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 02:18:35 AM
What. If you are feeding AC to the primary you know exactly what you are feeding it.

It is called an abstraction.  In this case an abstraction of the primary winding as a varying flux source only.

This means, that if you inadvertently acquire the knowledge of the AC voltage or amplitude or frequency or phase in the primary circuit then you mustn't use it in your calculations or conceptual analysis.  ...or use a secretive lab assistant that will set random amplitude, frequency and phase of the signal generator which supplies the primary winding with electric energy  ;) .

However, you can probe and use the knowledge about all electric signals occurring in the secondary circuit.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 02:21:47 AM
It is called an abstraction.  In this case an abstraction of the primary as a varying flux source only.

This means, that if you inadvertently acquire the knowledge of the AC voltage or amplitude or frequency or phase in the primary circuit then you mustn't use it in your calculations or conceptual analysis.  ...or use a secretive lab assistant that will set random amplitude, frequency and phase of the signal generator which supplies the primary winding with electric energy  ;) .
However, you can probe and use the knowledge about electric signals occurring in the secondary circuit.

Why would you deny yourself knowledge of the signal you feed into primary.
Is that some religious significance to you or.
No comment on emoji.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 10, 2020, 02:36:38 AM
Why would you deny yourself knowledge of the signal you feed into primary.
Because that knowledge cannot matter in this experiment.

I remind you that we are trying to determine whether the induced voltage leads the induced current in one inductor which is subjected to a varying external magnetic flux.
How this flux variation is generated is immaterial for this determination.

The varying flux can be generated by a moving magnet or by another inductor or magnetoacoustic effect or Villari effect or precessing nuclei.
How the varying flux is generated does not matter because if it did, then you would be dealing with a different question.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 02:41:12 AM
That's different from not knowing what you feed it but ok.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 04:30:02 AM
This is a test that I will let the reader judge.

Basically, there are three air coils with identical turns and DCRs that are placed in line horizontally as shown on a flat surface.  In this layout, the left coil is the current sensing coil, the right side coil is the voltage sensing coil and the center coil is driven with a 10kHz sine wave from a power amplifier.

The start of each winding is positioned at the top so polarities may be observed from the connections.  IOW, the electromagnetic source coil in the center has the finish as the common or ground, the current coil is shown with conventional flow from finish to start and the voltage winding has the ground on the start.  These are opposite from the dot connections expected if the coils were stacked on top of each other so please consider this.

The resultant scope pix has CH1(yel) as the input voltage source to the center coil, CH3(pnk) as the output voltage of the voltage sensing coil. and CH4(grn) is the current flow in the current sensing coil.

Regards,
Pm

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 10, 2020, 02:03:53 PM
Good morning PM.

Nice clear test.  I do have one question.  What is your load?  If the left coil is the current sensing coil then what is the load it is connected to?

Thanks,
Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: Grumage on October 10, 2020, 02:26:00 PM
Good morning PM.

Nice clear test.  I do have one question.  What is your load?  If the left coil is the current sensing coil then what is the load it is connected to?

Thanks,
Carroll

Hi Carroll.

I'm seeing a short " Yellow jumper " shorting the coil with the Current probe attached to it.

Cheers Graham.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 10, 2020, 02:36:22 PM
Hi Graham,

I see 3 ends to some yellow jumpers so I am not sure what is connected to what.  My eyesight is not too good right now.  I have got to have cataract surgery soon.  Thanks for your answer.

Take care,
Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 03:26:26 PM
If you're getting cataract surgery, astaxanthin is a must, in fact, it's a must in any case.

Get natural not synthetic.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 03:41:40 PM
Good morning PM.

Nice clear test.  I do have one question.  What is your load?  If the left coil is the current sensing coil then what is the load it is connected to?

Thanks,
Carroll

Carroll,

The only load to the center coil is the shorted coil on the left and it's dc resistance.  The coil on the right is of course open with scope probe load of 10M ohm and 3.9pf.

Regards,

Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 04:12:04 PM
Here is a scope pix of the 3 coil layout with a 2 pulse input to see the phasing from a zero electromagnetic start rather than continuous running periodically.

The specs on the coils are as follows- L1,L2,L3 = 746uH.  L1+L2 = 1.509mH, L1-L2 = 1.385mH, therefore the coupling K = .0415 between adjacent coils as pictured.

The formulae used to calculate the k factor are M=((Lseries+)-(Lseries-))/4 and k=M/(L1*L2)^.5  .

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 10, 2020, 04:19:42 PM
If you're getting cataract surgery, astaxanthin is a must, in fact, it's a must in any case.

Get natural not synthetic.

Thanks for the suggestion.  I did check the eye health complex multivitamin I am taking and that ingredient is in there.  I also looked it up and it appears to be another one of the amazing natural sources for good health.  I discovered that curcumin (the extract from turmeric) has some amazing healing powers also.  It completely cleared up the psoriasis on my hands that 2 different dermatologists had tried for 5 years to clear up without any success.  In six weeks the curcumin completely cleared up the psoriasis.

Thanks again,
Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 04:44:20 PM
Welcome. Yes, curcumin is great too.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 04:52:19 PM
OTOH, here is a test done with ferrite cores.  In the layout, two 3019 pot cores with no gap are enclosing a primary coil as a standard configuration.  Then on the outside of each end of this assembly,  an additional 3019 half core is placed with no gap that encloses a secondary coil.  This assembly is clamped together tightly.

So we have one primary and two secondaries that are separated electrically but are connected by the electromagnetic change in permeability in the common ferrite walls between the outside of the primary core and each outer half core containing the secondaries.

One secondary is shorted with a current probe to measure current while the opposite end secondary is connected to a 10k ohm load resister to dampen the self resonance of the secondary inductance with the 3.9pf scope probe capacitance.

In the scope pix we have CH1(yel) is the gate pulse driving the mosfet switch connected to the primary, CH3(pnk) is the output voltage across the 10k load resistor, and CH4(grn) is the shorted secondary current.  As one can see, the voltage and current are in phase.

The primary is purposely driven into moderate saturation to see the resulting effects on the phase.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 05:05:23 PM
Someone bring in Heins, reader will get false impression that current can't be delayed which is utter nonsense.

Message to Heins sent.

Besides in his video i linked in his bi toroid, when he put load to the secondary IV remained 90°  apart.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 05:51:18 PM
Someone bring in Heins, reader will get false impression that current can't be delayed which is utter nonsense.

Message to Heins sent.

Besides in his video i linked in his bi toroid, when he put load to the secondary IV remained 90°  apart.

Nix,

OK, I watched the Heins BiT video and his device is a reactive to real power converter with apparent gain.  As has been stated before, this is a transformer assembly with the primary source being considered which is not the criteria that Verpies specified.  Only the secondary or secondaries can be measured for parameters.

I could use one of my reactive to real converters for an example that operates at higher frequencies with infinite OU and input phase angles of 105 degrees but that is not in the true spirit of this discussion.

Experimental evidence is just that and speaks very loudly IMO.  One can simply accept it or replicate it to prove or disprove the evidence.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 05:59:33 PM
That current starts instantly in high inductance coil at high frequency induced by any means is too far out to accept based on few limited experiments.

Let's bring in someone expert in high inductance, high frequency, sc experts too, let's hear them.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: stivep on October 10, 2020, 06:07:11 PM
I could use one of my reactive to real converters for an example that operates at higher frequencies with infinite OU and input phase angles of 105 degrees but that is not in the true spirit of this discussion.
OU doesn't exist, never existed and will never exist or maybe  by OU you understand something else?
Wesley
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 06:17:46 PM
I bet if i asked this at yahoo answers, quora and stackexchange, they would all agree that in high inductance high frequency coil there is going to be a delay.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 06:47:35 PM
OU doesn't exist, never existed and will never exist or maybe  by OU you understand something else?
Wesley

Wesley, you are certainly entitled to your opinion but with all due respect I have to disagree.  Perhaps I should have defined my meaning of "OU" being more output than input and "infinite" meaning more energy is returned to the source than is consumed to produce real energy in a load.

You didn't question the technique used to perform this task but suffice it to say that the device at this point is not possible to build for technical reasons.  If you or anyone else can point the way to synthesizing sinewave frequencies in the 2-4MHz range using class D amplifier techniques so the mosfet switches used can be operated in both their normal forward conduction as well as reverse conduction, then it's a done deal.

The theory behind the gain is from the work of Arie DeGues as is best understood at this point in time.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 10, 2020, 06:50:12 PM
Magnet only motors prove OU in most simple and undeniable way. Few real ones on YT.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: stivep on October 10, 2020, 07:17:54 PM
Wesley, you are certainly entitled to your opinion but with all due respect I have to disagree.
Perhaps I should have defined my meaning of "OU" being more output than input and "infinite"
meaning more energy is returned to the source than is consumed to produce real energy in a load.
OU overunity  is usually understand as more  energy
OUT than energy delivered to the device or circuit.
That  will never be possible.
_______________________
https://projectcamelot.org/degeus.html (https://projectcamelot.org/degeus.html)
https://www.americanantigravity.com/arie-degeus-on-fusion-zero-point-energy (https://www.americanantigravity.com/arie-degeus-on-fusion-zero-point-energy)
Arie DeGues  was in my mind  a victim of   opposers  seeing conflict of interest who started to believe that he has something in his hands  despite  the reality of facts.
The same was with me, and "some" Russians till I explained to  the public that this will not help .. especially  today - in time  of internet even after I'm gone.
______________________________
J
Quote
un 15, 2016 · AMDG Scientific Corporation is a research & development company named after its founder and chief scientist,
the late Arie M. DeGeus, who discovered novel energy generating technologies, all of which feature ‘over-unity’ energy production.
https://peswiki.com/directory:amdg-scientific-corp (https://peswiki.com/directory:amdg-scientific-corp)
here is  mentioned OU that doesn't exist .
Project is dead.
_____________________________________

If you or anyone else can point the way to synthesizing sinewave frequencies in the 2-4MHz range using class D amplifier techniques so
the mosfet switches used can be operated in both their normal forward conduction as well as reverse conduction, then it's a done deal.
The theory behind the gain is from the work of Arie DeGues as is best understood at this point in time.
You feed D  with two signals at the same time  coming from two separate  generators.
In D class amplifier at channel #1  you installing  bandpass filter with bandwith of your desired frequency.
In D class amplifier at channel #2  you installing  bandpass filter with bandwith of your desired frequency.

after that you can do with these  two signals whatever you want. e.g. add,  subtract or take away , multiply,  modulate one with another  and reverse ....and so on.
there is nothing difficult or special about it.
Amplifier  must  be capable of  2 to 4MHz bandwidth at expected linearity.

Mentioned above  applies  to  single mosfet amplifier per channel as well.
https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tiducz2/tiducz2.pdf?ts=1602350182198&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.ti.com%252Ftool%252FTIDA-00733 (https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tiducz2/tiducz2.pdf?ts=1602350182198&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.ti.com%252Ftool%252FTIDA-00733)
Wesley
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 08:11:06 PM
Yet another test device that may be the closet to meeting Verpies requirements but only he can determine that.

Referring to the pix, the induction source consists of two identically wound primary air coils that are placed back to back or finish to finish as shown.  The finish winding are connected together and the start windings are also connected together with both coils therefore in parallel.  In this connection form, the coils will operate in a bucking mode and in the center where they meet, a compressed unipolar magnetic field will be formed that will start from zero, increase and then return to zero.

This field will induce a voltage and current to a secondary that is positioned directly over the junction of the two primaries at a right angle to the axis of the primaries.  This is the elongated coil seen in the pix.

The scope pix has CH1(yel) as the gate drive pulse, CHR1(wht) is the stored and dampened voltage waveform, and CH4(grn) is the coil current.  Since both are referenced to the same bucking field timing, it is seen that the voltage and current are in phase.

The primary bucking coils operate as follows: Picture both coils placed side by side with coil1 start-finish, coil2 start-finish.  Now rotate coil2 180 degrees so the finish meets with the finish of coil1.  Using the right had rule, now determine the flux directions in both coils if the finish wires are connected and used as the input.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 08:37:35 PM
Wesley,

I will attach the DeGues patent that I feel best describes the operation of the circuit I disclose in the attached pdf.  The requirement to accomplish the MEI function as shown is to have a sampling frequency at least at 4x3MHz and this is far from ideal and in fact may not work.

As can be seen in the paper, the energy reverses each quarter cycle so the sampling must be considerably higher to produce as faithful a sinewave as possible.  This would require sampling frequencies in the 30-60MHz range or higher.

Some might say use DDS technology.  DDS chips operate at low levels when compared to the sine voltage in the MEI.  This means high voltage, high current, high speed devices must be used plus they also be made with a process that allows them to reverse conduct.  Also note the input reactive power required from ~400w-~600w peak to produce ~35w real output.  Whatever is synthesizing the sinewave must be able to handle this reactive energy that is returned to it.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: stivep on October 10, 2020, 09:16:33 PM
Wesley,
I will attach the DeGues patent that I feel best describes the operation of the circuit I disclose in the attached pdf.
https://youtu.be/HrAWejpez38?t=867 (https://youtu.be/HrAWejpez38?t=867)
this concept will not work but in therms of  measurement I agree.
look below:
Wesley
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 10, 2020, 09:36:30 PM

Itsu has a quick try at Verpies experiment

tps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U3ZCh3gweuk (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U3ZCh3gweuk)

Itsu work bench link

https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3691.msg84734;topicseen#msg84734 (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3691.msg84734;topicseen#msg84734)

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 10:39:09 PM
https://youtu.be/HrAWejpez38?t=867 (https://youtu.be/HrAWejpez38?t=867)
this concept will not work but in therms of  measurement I agree.
look below:
Wesley

Wesley,

I don't grasp what points you are trying to make here.  If you don't agree with Arie DeGues on this patent that's fine.

Your issue with the AM503/A6302 combo I don't follow. Obviously this combo does not have as high a frequency capability as the Caddock CSR and Tek TPP0500B probe even when de-skewed properly which was done before these tests were run.

Look closely and compare the blue and green traces which are the CSR and current probe respectively and you will see that the blue trace has a slightly larger current lead than the green.  This is evident from the Math measurements which show the average negative instantaneous product of CH1(yel)*CH2(blu) to be higher than CH1(yel)*CH4(grn).  It is a shame that I didn't measure and display the current lead for CH2(blu) which would show a slightly higher value.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 10, 2020, 10:48:05 PM
Verpies,

I see that Itsu ran your preferred bicycle test and the conclusion came out with no phase shift.  However, If I understood you correctly (which I may not of), you said the induction source was not important.  If so, how do you explain the experiment I ran in post #133 with a follow up in post #139?  This experiment used a common induction source balanced between the two secondaries and there is obvious phase shift as per Nix's claim!

I lost sleep over this trying to understand!

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: stivep on October 11, 2020, 12:12:09 AM
Wesley,

I don't grasp what points you are trying to make here.  If you don't agree with Arie DeGues on this patent that's fine.

Your issue with the AM503/A6302 combo I don't follow. Obviously this combo does not have as high a frequency capability as the Caddock CSR and Tek TPP0500B probe even when de-skewed properly which was done before these tests were run.

Look closely and compare the blue and green traces which are the CSR and current probe respectively and you will see that the blue trace has a slightly larger current lead than the green.  This is evident from the Math measurements which show the average negative instantaneous product of CH1(yel)*CH2(blu) to be higher than CH1(yel)*CH4(grn).  It is a shame that I didn't measure and display the current lead for CH2(blu) which would show a slightly higher value.

Regards,
Pm

Most often made mistakes :
https://youtu.be/uDcfevfwyoc?t=307 (https://youtu.be/uDcfevfwyoc?t=307)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMXiD3dKYJc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMXiD3dKYJc)
but there is also another  problem with  phase difference.
In this video  it is shown that  (~only)  at this particular frequency 200MHz  using  different probes it makes signal  between two ports of the oscilloscope  inverted  at 180 degrees.
Lecroy: DDE-3000 series. ( in  video)
I have personally:
Lecroy  WaveRunner64xI
https://youtu.be/HrAWejpez38?t=815 (https://youtu.be/HrAWejpez38?t=815)
Quote
The deskew for the current probe and amplifier has been adjusted and calibrated against the voltage measured across Rs with the CH3 probe.
- Yes you can point  at bandwidth limitation but it's not always a case.
So the amplifiers and  probes must be at its best exactly the same and calibrated for an average oscilloscope.
or you get an error in your measurement  and that leads you to  wrong conclusions.

Wesley
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: citfta on October 11, 2020, 12:23:28 AM
Verpies,

I see that Itsu ran your preferred bicycle test and the conclusion came out with no phase shift.  However, If I understood you correctly (which I may not of), you said the induction source was not important.  If so, how do you explain the experiment I ran in post #133 with a follow up in post #139?  This experiment used a common induction source balanced between the two secondaries and there is obvious phase shift as per Nix's claim!

I lost sleep over this trying to understand!

Regards,
Pm

Hi guys.

First a big thanks to both Pm and Itsu for their tests.

Pm,  I see Verpies hasn't answered you yet so if you don't mind I will take a shot at answering your question.  I hope Verpies will soon answer and make any corrections needed to my answer.  I think the difference in your test and Itsu's is the way you are measuring the current.  By using a second coil to measure the current you are essentially measuring the secondary of a transformer.  And of course the secondary is a reactive component.  And any generating coil or power source will exhibit the voltage leading the current in an inductive reactive circuit.  And also exhibit the current leading the voltage if the the circuit is a capacitive reactive circuit.

Hopefully Verpies will explain that better than I have.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 11, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
Just a note
I believe Verpies has traveled for a
Previous Commitment.

And internet access and time to participate
Are NiL

A return Sometime on Monday
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 11, 2020, 06:56:41 PM
Verpies,

I see that Itsu ran your preferred bicycle test and the conclusion came out with no phase shift.  However, If I understood you correctly (which I may not of), you said the induction source was not important.  If so, how do you explain the experiment I ran in post #133 with a follow up in post #139?  This experiment used a common induction source balanced between the two secondaries and there is obvious phase shift as per Nix's claim!

I lost sleep over this trying to understand!

Regards,
Pm

It seems that both Verpies and Nix may both be correct as certain test results seem to be time dependent!  I will be attempting to show what I mean later today.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 11, 2020, 08:27:10 PM
OK, this is a test that is quite revealing IMO.  It shows that both Verpies and Nix are correct in their arguments depending on the time rate of induction for a given L/R.

For example, the test device is shown in the first pix and is basically the same bucking arrangement show in an earlier post but this time it has two identical secondaries to measure voltage and current.  The driver for the primaries is a solid state power amp as before.

The first scope pix shows a single pulse of a 20kHz sinewave in CH1(yel) that is applied to the bucking primaries.  CH4(grn) is the current in the secondary closest to the center of the bucking coils and CH3(pnk) is voltage across the secondary that is the farther away from the center of the bucking coils.  From this we see the current lag behind the voltage approaches 90 degrees.

The second scope pix shows the same layout and connections only now, the single pulse sinewave is 400Hz.  We can clearly see that the current lags the voltage only by a few degrees.  This particular scenario is close to Itsu's setup as the PMs on the wheel are operating with long periods that allow the voltage and current to be in phase.

My conclusion: The current being in-phase with the voltage or lagging the voltage by any amount, is dependent on the period of time the source induction is applied.  This means the result is dependent on the L/R of the coils being measured and compared.

I will run this same comparative test with the three side-by-side coils to see if the results are the same.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 11, 2020, 09:28:18 PM
Here is the 3 coil setup.  It is basically the same type of test as the previous except the primary coil or the middle coil has 3019 pot cores inserted into it to raise the inductance at the lower frequencies.

First pix is the layout, 2nd pix is the test at 20kHz and the 3rd pix is at 50Hz.

I guess a question would be if Itsu spun his bicycle wheel at a higher RPM, would the in-phase current begin to lag toward 90 degrees?

Regards,
Pm

Edited-
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 12, 2020, 01:39:39 PM
I don't see how Verpies can be right, he claims just the opposite, that higher frequency/speed will not produce the delay. It's not a matter of who's right in ego sense, i don't give a damn, it's just that he claims opposite of what happens.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: partzman on October 12, 2020, 04:41:20 PM

Hi guys.

First a big thanks to both Pm and Itsu for their tests.

Pm,  I see Verpies hasn't answered you yet so if you don't mind I will take a shot at answering your question.  I hope Verpies will soon answer and make any corrections needed to my answer.  I think the difference in your test and Itsu's is the way you are measuring the current.  By using a second coil to measure the current you are essentially measuring the secondary of a transformer.  And of course the secondary is a reactive component.  And any generating coil or power source will exhibit the voltage leading the current in an inductive reactive circuit.  And also exhibit the current leading the voltage if the the circuit is a capacitive reactive circuit.

Hopefully Verpies will explain that better than I have.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Carroll,

I see that I missed your post, sorry!  Yes, I agree with you.  However, I think Verpies said that any source of induction could be used as long as it was not considered in the analysis.  I'm probably wrong on this and he will correct me I'm sure.

Regards,
Pm
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 12, 2020, 07:11:16 PM
Here is a guy from Zimbabwe, 15kW solid state device

https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=914
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 02:19:27 AM
Correction, it's 50kW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FPTWzLBQW0

https://www.herald.co.zw/just-in-young-zim-innovator-features-on-thrive-ii-documentary/

He's been in California for 3 years under auspices of US gov.

https://263chat.com/trump-scoops-top-zimbabwean-inventor/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47KA57SikYw

https://www.techzim.co.zw/2020/09/maxwell-chikumbutso-is-back-claims-he-has-a-generator-that-powers-10-houses-at-once/

Of course, he keeps the principle tightly secret while claiming wanting to save the world.

What a hypocrite.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 13, 2020, 02:43:28 PM
Will be posting a few Vids here from Verpies
Shortly

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 13, 2020, 03:22:34 PM
This is a test that I will let the reader judge.
Thank you for making this experiment. I think no one will suspect you of being biased now.

I've been away for the weekend and I see there are a lot of unread messages, I have not read them yet but I am replying with a video of an experiment which is very similar to yours (albeit it is more exhaustive).

Basically, there are three air coils: One coil driven by a PA, which generates time-varying flux and two identical coils wound with enameled copper tape for measuring induced voltage and induced current just like in your experiment. Their positions and scope channels assignments are described in the video.

https://youtu.be/2wPW79aB_Tg (https://youtu.be/2wPW79aB_Tg)

This is also a test that I will let you judge.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: verpies on October 13, 2020, 03:40:47 PM
Using separate coils for sensing the voltage and current is not more accurate and in my opinion it is not even necessary to resolve this issue, but it is cleaner conceptually and it is more difficult to object to the result of an experiment that uses separate coils for sensing induced voltage and induced current ...and since it does not skew the experiment much when identical coils are used, I just agree to it.
I'd like to go on record and write, that I made a hasty mistake in agreeing that a modified experiment with two coils will act the same as with one (see my words marked in red).

I should not have agreed to using separate coils in the experiment since using two coils sidesteps the phenomenon of common flux causing induction in one* coil , as illustrated by the experiment in the previous post.
An experiment with separate coils is an an experiment about the behavior of two magnetically uncoupled inductive circuits instead of one.

*which was the subject of our discussion
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 03:53:00 PM
As you say yourself it's due to shadowing, when current coil is facing the driving coil, voltage coil sees flux from current coil only, ofc they are gonna be in phase.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 03:55:20 PM
I would appreciate someone comment on this Zimbabwe guy, what do you think he is doing, probably along the lines of Don Smith and James Schwartz. He is calling his generator "Sonic" implying sound.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 13, 2020, 06:56:59 PM
I would appreciate someone comment on this Zimbabwe guy, what do you think he is doing, probably along the lines of Don Smith and James Schwartz. He is calling his generator "Sonic" implying sound.

Greetings, nix85

It's hard to tell because as you point out "he keeps the principle tightly secret...."

His devices "harness radio frequencies...the microsonic energy device which is the main part of the machine, the one that harnesses [the] radio frequency [and] convert it into DC current...in the DC current we've got what we call a down converter (DC-DC step-down converter)...." https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=1167 (https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=1167)

It sounds to me like he is using the concept of a particle collider ( WTF is a particle collider? https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/05/wtf-is-a-particle-collider/ (https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/05/wtf-is-a-particle-collider/) ), only using radio frequencies instead.

If we look at this ad for Microsonic Earplugs ( https://pro.ultimateears.com/products/microsonic-earplugs (https://pro.ultimateears.com/products/microsonic-earplugs) ) it says that they "reduce all frequencies". What are we doing when we "reduce" a frequency? Slow it down? Turn it into a lower frequency?

The energy device inventor recognizes that there is very little energy in radio frequencies ( "...radio frequencies are usually measured in micro(?), very little energy...." https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=1116 (https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=1116) ). Yet he is using those low-energy radio waves in a way that turns them into usable power.

My take: Two equal radio frequencies going in opposite sides of a coil and colliding in the middle should not only lower (reduce) the frequency, but also increase the amplitude of the wave, thus increasing the power.

Of course, he could also be using Heterodyning ( "A heterodyne is a signal frequency that is created by combining or mixing two other frequencies using a signal processing technique called heterodyning...Heterodyning is used to shift one frequency range into another, new frequency range, and is also involved in the processes of modulation and demodulation. The two input frequencies are combined in a nonlinear signal-processing device such as a vacuum tube, transistor, or diode, usually called a mixer. A major application of the heterodyne process is in the superheterodyne radio receiver circuit, which is used in virtually all modern radio receivers".  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterodyne (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterodyne)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver) )( Idea about Heterodyning came from Zed at the Don Smith forum discussing Don Smith's use of radio frequencies ).

And of course, the inventor of this energy device could also be employing Rectenna tech. In fact, He uses similar language found in a Rectenna article.
Inventor Here: "I think this is something that Nikol[a] Tesla saves(?) when he started the journey of trying to transmit electric using radio frequency. In that time people thought maybe he was crazy or something. I'm happy that He
saves(?)...that was ahead of his time, that time. So I would want to believe that we have managed to accomplish the work that He started back then".  https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=1076 (https://youtu.be/NHePKrB__RM?t=1076)

Rectenna article: "Envisioned by Nikola Tesla, wireless energy transmission was made possible in the 1960s with the invention of the rectenna".  https://www.ece.cmu.edu/news-and-events/story/2019/05/rectennas-converting-radio-waves-into-electricity.html (https://www.ece.cmu.edu/news-and-events/story/2019/05/rectennas-converting-radio-waves-into-electricity.html)

Rectenna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectenna (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectenna)

Cheers
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 07:29:37 PM
Ofc he is not using low-energy radio waves or radio waves of any kind except probably as excitation.

He is converting higher order energy into electricity just like many others did/do.

Key is probably resonance, i never saw the back of his device, i guess i would see plates like James Schwartz uses, basically bismuth aluminum caps with fine wire coils inbetween or similar.

Remember Schwartz said he is feeding multiple frequencies at once, these frequencies might be location dependent as we see in his 6kW device from ~2009 that he first finds a local frequency unless that is a sham like "73-74 element" rods he lied about.

Probably resonant + harmonics, God knows, delicate stuff.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 07:38:27 PM
Most people here have not yet recognized the IMMENSE value of the paper HARNESSING THE FORCE OF GRAVITY, written by the son of great Edgard Hollingshead summerizing his father's work in just 8 pages of pure TRUTH.

His father developed a ray machine that basically used disruptive discharges that could vaporize matter into nothing or make aluminum 20% lighter etc, he only said he built up atomic speed (voltage) and then released it suddenly, disruptive discharges ala Tesla and others.

He proposes the most valid and most simple theory of gravity which perfectly aligns with that revealed in occult book Dweller on two planets, this is science of Atlantis, the SAME model from 13,000 years ago. Negative gravity is here, it's just that we provide no resistance to it unless we speed up a little.

http://svpwiki.com/pdffiles/hollingshead-original.pdf
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 13, 2020, 08:17:02 PM
His father developed a ray machine that basically used disruptive discharges that could vaporize matter into nothing....

I try to avoid conspiracies, as thinking too much tends to make people crazy ;D

But the people who made this video would probably have a field day with the info you presented about vaporization!
https://youtu.be/aIDN_Uzg6IY (https://youtu.be/aIDN_Uzg6IY)
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 08:25:25 PM
Is gravity or magnetism a conspiracy, is it hard to accept there are other streams of energy so far rarely observed.

As for 911, i believe it was controlled demolition, but let's not get into that.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 13, 2020, 09:25:08 PM
Is gravity or magnetism a conspiracy, is it hard to accept there are other streams of energy so far rarely observed.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 09:28:56 PM
then don't call it conspiracy and say not to discuss it
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 13, 2020, 09:34:32 PM
then don't call it conspiracy and say not to discuss it

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 13, 2020, 09:42:35 PM
I try to avoid conspiracies, as thinking too much tends to make people crazy ;D
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 14, 2020, 12:05:03 AM
Just to add Mr. Hollingshead also reported making metals permanently hot.

There is no limit what you can do with neutral energy.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: ramset on October 14, 2020, 11:06:42 PM

Passing this along
And I believe more experiments will be done in near future

——///—////———-/////////:

Here
From physics.stackexchange.com some info about the magnitude of current induced in a superconducting coil.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/587133/current-induced-in-a-superconducting-coil (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/587133/current-induced-in-a-superconducting-coil)

THE QUESTION, which was asked is:
"Does the magnitude of current induced in a shorted superconducting coil depend on the external flux's rate of change dΦ/dt ?"
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 14, 2020, 11:39:12 PM
I already quoted stackexchange along same line

"since conductors have inductance (in fact, superconductors are used most often to create magnets like for an MRI scanner), applying a voltage would not (immediately) cause an infinite current to flow."

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/179374/is-current-in-superconductors-infinite-if-they-have-0-resistance-then-i-v-r-s
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: AlienGrey on October 16, 2020, 12:54:28 AM
in the above 'thug' snap shot, he trying to communicate 'bozo' uthority, thing is with serpository like he is holding.
then who needs enema's like him ?   :o
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on October 16, 2020, 02:10:57 AM
...🎃🎃🎃🎃🎃...
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 16, 2020, 08:12:09 PM
Damn, this pearl above has some magic spelling perks.
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on October 18, 2020, 12:31:49 AM
Seems they finally made a room temp superconductor, under great pressure tho.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2801-z.epdf?sharing_token=3kKq3pMPa1uyc0BrCNvII9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0OU1770499h4PWDTMPrUp87SqN0I66ctMEA5xbNu7HqE6UKVTsQWjakxqQR7C5u_-iEz8aq5buiil_55YAC6fo4anWz-c3ujVU24QsQPowTRdpVhDmSHxrs_jRguC2oTqrwnAt_Zm9xddfbUxVxfdOFyqwP7A5wWDliMa7aqvKqPSJYkvwQBRYNtNzbIjdgr1g%3D&tracking_referrer=www.technologyreview.com
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: stivep on November 07, 2020, 03:28:45 PM
https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg552959/#msg552959
some useful information
about  single magnetic field alignment of protons and than rapid switching to earth magnetic field.Wesley
Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: AllanV on November 13, 2020, 07:58:05 PM
This is strange and possibly the reason i got so little voltage from my all N rotor magnets and aircore toroid stator.

We all know when magnet approaches a normal coil you get voltage in one direction, 0 in the middle and opposite voltage as it crosses the other side of the coil.

All sweet. But look at this. I suggest you watch the whole vid but first 4 and half min are more important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmENeg5YSCw

When he sweeped that coil exposing just one side to field, he got AC voltage, first small negative voltage from side N flux, then higher positive voltage as coil passed the center of the magnet and then suprisingly JUST AS HIGH or even higher negative voltage as coil crosses from strong central S flux to weak side N flux...

If you look at 3:23 he does it again, it really produces equal voltage in both directions using just one side of the coil and sweep in just one direction. Slow it down to 0.25x and you will see clearly a full AC spike from one sweep to the left.

But when he crosses the magnet across the coil horizontally using both sides of the coil, in usual manner, the second spike is lower.

What troubles me is does this mean we cannot use only N poles to induce DC voltage over aircore toroid?

Has anyone tried this? If not, i'd appreciate if you do, i tore my toroid apart so can't do it at the moment.

It is crucial that we know this. Does single pole really produce equal voltage in both directions due to sudden change of flux from dense central flux to much weaker opposite side flux.

When i gave it bit more thought it can't be any other way, significant change of flux must produce voltage, it's just that induction is usually not done this way so we tend to forget that just cause you are using one pole does not mean you will get DC.

Hi nix85,

Sometime ago a Bedinni type mono pole motor was built and it has a very small output. There are three windings with one as a feedback to switch the transistor.

To increase the output requires a little effort as is usual.
Thinking it through it was decided to double wind the stator pole and use a separate two winding inductor to send a reverse pulse through one winding. The currents were switched through the stator and then the inductor in a complete circuit.

A transformer action can change the magnetic field instantly and when a turns ratio is used it can cause more current to flow in one winding in the reverse direction.
This makes more amp turns in one direction only which changes the polarity.

In general terms a pulse is applied to draw the magnet toward the pole. The timed pulse is turned on and then off at the right moment.
Eddie currents are developed as the magnet crosses the pole causing drag.  As the magnet leaves the stator pole it is attracted.

When iron is magnetized the strength of field in the polarity of the stator is retained for a short time and needs to be actively reversed.

The speed of the rotor is relatively slow without the reverse current, reverse polarity action and a recovered voltage through a diode is approximately 130 volts.

With the extra inductor to repel the magnets, 400 volts was achieved with less input current.  The speed increase is significant.

The Bedinni device has three windings with one as a feed back to the base of the transistor. Just looking at the drawing shows there would be a very small polarity change induced by the input /output windings and feed back winding.

There is a gain in output when the magnetic effect becomes the link between windings in a transformer type action.

Title: Re: AC voltage from single magnetic pole
Post by: nix85 on November 18, 2020, 05:35:00 AM
Hi nix85,

Sometime ago a Bedinni type mono pole motor was built and it has a very small output. There are three windings with one as a feedback to switch the transistor.

To increase the output requires a little effort as is usual.
Thinking it through it was decided to double wind the stator pole and use a separate two winding inductor to send a reverse pulse through one winding. The currents were switched through the stator and then the inductor in a complete circuit.

A transformer action can change the magnetic field instantly and when a turns ratio is used it can cause more current to flow in one winding in the reverse direction.
This makes more amp turns in one direction only which changes the polarity.

In general terms a pulse is applied to draw the magnet toward the pole. The timed pulse is turned on and then off at the right moment.
Eddie currents are developed as the magnet crosses the pole causing drag.  As the magnet leaves the stator pole it is attracted.

When iron is magnetized the strength of field in the polarity of the stator is retained for a short time and needs to be actively reversed.

The speed of the rotor is relatively slow without the reverse current, reverse polarity action and a recovered voltage through a diode is approximately 130 volts.

With the extra inductor to repel the magnets, 400 volts was achieved with less input current.  The speed increase is significant.

The Bedinni device has three windings with one as a feed back to the base of the transistor. Just looking at the drawing shows there would be a very small polarity change induced by the input /output windings and feed back winding.

There is a gain in output when the magnetic effect becomes the link between windings in a transformer type action.

no need for extra inductor no need for iron (god forbid!) no need for transistors.... just deep understanding of what exactly happens and then follows the geometry and all the rest. without this understanding one can only become another failed replicator with confused theory of how it "should work". it's best to invent ur own not follow bedinis or anyone.