Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.  (Read 18696 times)

Offline seychelles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 917
RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« on: December 18, 2021, 04:54:04 PM »
I THINK TINMAN IS ON A SUPER GREAT IDEA. LET US ALL PUT OUR GOD
GIVEN GRAY MATTER TOGETHER TO GET THIS GOING TO FREE ENERGY STATUS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJM00HAbuKw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmTCj5E8Si4&t=1130s

Floor

  • Guest
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2021, 07:44:42 PM »
observation

The magnet which is interior to the rim of the ferrous fly wheel
is more interactive with the fly wheel than is the exterior magnet.

Offline captainpecan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2021, 10:17:40 AM »
What am I missing here?


I get the whole concept of what he is showing. It looks like an interesting experiment for sure. I understand how he is planning to collect energy in the coil from it. But what I am not understanding, is if it does what he claims, and it pulls in with the force of 3 magnets and leaves with only the force of 1 magnet, then why doesn't it self run without any power at all? He would have more out than in and with a little spin it would continue to increase speed all on its own. Something does not appear to match what he is explaining that he is seeing.


I have no doubt that he is seeing an increase as he ads magnets. What I am missing here, is how he is able to determine it is leaving with way less force. That force needed to break it free from the magnets is not tested in this demo. If I am understanding his demo correctly, I think he will find that it takes the same force to release the pull of the magnets as it the pull of the magnets gave to it on the way in. Or possibly a bit less of course. Am I not seeing something correctly here?

Offline seychelles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 917
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2021, 10:40:18 AM »
WHAT YOU ARE NOT SEEING IS WHEN THE STEEL PLATE WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE FLYWHEEL APPROACHES THE TWO OPPOSING REPELLING NIBS, THE PLATE IS ATTRACTED TO THE MAGNETS BY VIRTUE OF 4 TIMES THE MAGNETIC FIELD FORCE. AND AS IT IS TRAPPED IN BETWEEN
IN THE REPELLING MAGNETS, ALL IT TAKES IS A VERY LOW ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCE TO BREAK THE EQUILIBRIUM HOLD FORCE. AND THEN AGAIN  WAKE THE LOCK UP GENIE PUSH REPELLING FORCE. BUT OF CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE IS THE STORED MOMENTUM OF THE FLYWHEEL ONCE IN MOTION. PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT SHOOT THE MESSENGER.

Floor

  • Guest
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #4 on: December 19, 2021, 03:20:00 PM »
@ captainpecan

quote from captainpecan
"But what I am not understanding, is if it does what he claims, and it pulls
in with  the force of 3 magnets and leaves with only the force of 1 magnet,
then why doesn't it self run without any power at all? "
end of the quote

One should note that each magnet he is using is actually composed of two magnets combined
in attraction, more or less as one magnet.  This may or may not be significant. I mention it only
in the interest of being accurate.  Also note that the Tin man refers to each of these magnets
(one made from two) as though it is a single magnet during the videos.

The rotating ferrous plate's removal from between the "two" magnets (one on either
side of the rotating ferrous plate) is resisted by the same amount of force as it was
attracted in by the "two" magnets.  No net gain.

While using the  "two"   permanent magnets (one on either side of the rotating ferrous plate)
The rotating plate is pulled into position between the two magnets with a force which is from
3 to 4 times greater than the force it is pulled in by, when only one magnet is present.

One might expect the force of two magnets to be double that of one magnet, but it being
as much as four times greater than when only one magnet is used,  gives rise to interesting
possibilities. 

If one of the permanent magnets is replaced with an electromagnet, one is tripling the
rotating plate's entrance force, while the electromagnet is on, and reducing rotating plate's
exit force to that of one permanent magnet upon exit (when the electromagnet is off).

This would in theory, double the    effective    power of the electromagnet.

    However ...

1. We have not seen measurements of the force when one permanent magnet is
used and the electromagnet is in position but not turned on (it has a ferrous core).

2. Tin man has only demonstrated measurements of peak forces.

This is ok, as measuring input and output electrical power will serve just as well and
self running would be self appearant.

         an other video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQtJTodw3QQ

Offline captainpecan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2021, 08:28:45 PM »
Quote
WHAT YOU ARE NOT SEEING IS WHEN THE STEEL PLATE WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE FLYWHEEL APPROACHES THE TWO OPPOSING REPELLING NIBS, THE PLATE IS ATTRACTED TO THE MAGNETS BY VIRTUE OF 4 TIMES THE MAGNETIC FIELD FORCE. AND AS IT IS TRAPPED IN BETWEENIN THE REPELLING MAGNETS, ALL IT TAKES IS A VERY LOW ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCE TO BREAK THE EQUILIBRIUM HOLD FORCE. AND THEN AGAIN  WAKE THE LOCK UP GENIE PUSH REPELLING FORCE. BUT OF CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE IS THE STORED MOMENTUM OF THE FLYWHEEL ONCE IN MOTION. PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT SHOOT THE MESSENGER.


See, that is what I am missing. I do not see that there is less force leaving the magnetic field. He never tests that. If it really does require 1/4 the energy to leave and the amount of energy gained as it approaches, that is very easy see with a simple test. Not necessarily the amount of energy, but the fact that there would be a difference in the amount.


If he simply releases the scale and the back bolt to allow the flywheel to fully rotate again. All he has to do is very slowly allow the flywheel to rotate forward until it begins to pull towards the magnets. If he lets it do its thing, what I believe you will see is that it will in fact pull the flywheel around until the metal passes the gap but it will then slow to a stop and pull backwards again because I do not believe he can show a greater force pulling in that what it is needed to leave. If however, the metal travels past the gap and continues through and past that "gate" pulling it back, then he really does something there. Unfortunately, I don't see him being able to duplicate that effect. I sure hope he can.


Also, for further understanding, his test is using magnets on the outside, as well as magnets on the inside. But his pulse motor appears to replace the outer magnets with his coil.. (electro magnet)... Does he still have outer magnets somewhere when he is using his coil and I am not seeing it in his video? If not, his pulse would have to be EXACTLY the correct current and voltage at EXACTLY the correct moment to accurately duplicate his permanent magnet test. Is the guy who is making these videos discussing this on a thread in THIS forum somewhere, or is he referring to another one?


Also, don't get me wrong here. I'm being negative. I'm always very open minded. I'm just always fact based and trying to dig into the facts as much as possible to understand what is actually going on here.

Offline captainpecan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2021, 08:36:48 PM »

The rotating ferrous plate's removal from between the "two" magnets (one on either
side of the rotating ferrous plate) is resisted by the same amount of force as it was
attracted in by the "two" magnets.  No net gain.



Yeah, see that's what I'm seeing is the case here as well. However, it seems that he says it takes less to leave the field. If that is true, I'm not seeing that.


But like you say, if he is seeing a 4 times attraction with only double the magnets, that could be an effect that can be worth noting. It is so hard to actually test the facts of that in reality though. Only testing the peak doesn't really prove anything, but I'm not exactly sure how to make a better test. This one is difficult.

Floor

  • Guest
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2021, 02:36:59 AM »
See, that is what I am missing. I do not see that there is less force leaving the magnetic field. He never tests that.

You are correct.
When there are two magnets  (one inside the plate and one outside)
There is not less force to leave the field.  It is exactly the same, entering and or leaving.

When there is one magnet  (inside only) you are correct also.
There is not less force to leave the field.  It is exactly the same, entering or leaving.


He never tests that.

Testing the entering force     IS    testing the exiting force.  They are equal.  This is assumed /
well know in these conditions / goes without saying.

If it really does require 1/4 the energy to leave and the amount of energy gained as it approaches, that is very easy see with a simple test. Not necessarily the amount of energy, but the fact that there would be a difference in the amount.

It requires a lesser peak force for the plate to exit away from one magnet
than is needed in order to exit from between the two magnets. 
                           This is what he is demonstrating.

The difference is there, only when there is one of the magnets instead of two.

What is being demonstrated, is that there is three to four time less peak force
present when only one magnet is used. One would reasonably expect that the force
difference would be two times less.... but not three to four times less !
Tinman clearly demonstrates that it is between 3 and four times less.

In this kind of configuration, I would expect that the total energy is 3 to 4 times less
as well.  Only more test will tell.

Also, for further understanding, his test is using magnets on the outside, as well as magnets on the inside.

Be more clear please. Your statment is less than worthless.  Watch the videos again,
and try to not waste other peoples time by asking question you should allread have
the answers to, if you studied the videos and posts.

But his pulse motor appears to replace the outer magnets with his coil.. (electro magnet)... Does he still have outer magnets somewhere when he is using his coil and I am not seeing it in his video?

The pulse motor only has two electromagnets on the outside, two stator magnets on the inside
and four "torque" plates.

I get it, that you don't understand the videos or the posts either.  I recommend that you
read, watch and study them before your next post.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2021, 05:45:45 AM by Floor »

Floor

  • Guest
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2021, 02:48:10 AM »

Offline captainpecan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2021, 04:02:18 AM »
You are correct.
When there are two magnets  (one inside the plate and one outside)
There is not less force to leave the field.  It is exactly the same, entering and or leaving.

When there is one magnet  (inside only) you are correct also.
There is not less force to leave the field.  It is exactly the same, entering or leaving.

Testing the entering force     IS    testing the exiting force.  They are equal.  This is assumed /
well know in these conditions / goes without saying.

It requires a lesser peak force for the plate to exit away from one magnet
than is needed in order to exit from between the two magnets. 
                           This is what he is demonstrating.

The difference is there, only when there is one of the magnets instead of two.

What is being demonstrated, is that there is three to four time less peak force
present when only one magnet is used. One would reasonably expect that the force
difference would be two times less.... but not three to four times less !
Tinman clearly demonstrates that it is between 3 and four times less.

In this kind of configuration, I would expect that the total energy is 3 to 4 times less
as well.  Only more test will tell.
 


Thank you for that response. So it is how I was seeing it. However what he was trying to show in his test was what was confusing me. I misunderstood and thought he was trying to say it left with less force and I simply asked for clarification because I was missing something. I went to his channel amd watched all 3 videos multiple times before I posted asking, but I was misunderstanding. Thank you for clearing it up.


Quote
Be more clear please. Your statment is less than worthless.  Watch the videos again,
and try to not waste other peoples time by asking question you should allread have
the answers to, if you studied the videos and posts.


And that kind of a response is exactly why I stopped following this forum years ago. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be such a condescending ass to someone simply trying to understand and asking questions. I was under the impression that this is what this thread was created for. Uncalled for and exactly what runs people away from helping us find new concepts by sharing thoughts amd knowledge. I hope it is rare you respond in that manner considering all you have contributed to the forum.

Floor

  • Guest
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #10 on: December 20, 2021, 05:50:20 AM »
Your right, but then again, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be a lazy
entitled ass, instead of contributing something of merit to the topics either.

My hope...

is that you will do more in the future to diligently contribute, rather than participate as
just another arm chair critic. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJM00HAbuKw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQtJTodw3QQ

   best wishes
        floor

Offline captainpecan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2021, 06:35:47 AM »
Your right, but then again, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be a lazy
entitled ass, instead of contributing something of merit to the topics either.

My hope...

is that you will do more in the future to diligently contribute, rather than participate as
just another arm chair critic. 

   best wishes
        floor


I'm just glad I don't feel the need to be a garbage human being to make myself feel better inside. Maybe if you could have gotten over yourself for 2 seconds you would have noticed I mentioned I was trying to understand it so I could test it myself since oz specifically was mentioning trying to help it be replicated by someone having no luck. I even asked if the forum he was referencing was this forum or another one because I wanted to follow it more.. that's not arm chair quarterbacking. I'm a damn builder because that is how I learn and always has been.. I am on another build right now that just so happens to have many of the same materials that are perfect to try and see if I could replicate what he is seeing. I simply wanted to follow along and learn.. But seriously, I couldn't care less how miserable of a person you have to be inside to treat everyone that way. I'm just thankful I'm not that way. I'm happy many intelligent experimenters are sharing their work and asking questions about it for me to learn from here. If I have to ignore hateful people along the way, so be it. Some people just don't grasp the fact that we are all here working towards the same goals. I will just continue with my other build and share my work as planned. I don't need people like you bringing me down to make themselves feel better.

Floor

  • Guest
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2021, 06:42:13 AM »
 Do you want to stay off topic or contribute something to the topic?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJM00HAbuKw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQtJTodw3QQ

Offline seychelles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 917
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2021, 07:47:23 AM »
I SAY CAPTAIN HE SAYS WHAT. WATER OFF THE DUCK'S BACK I AM WITH YOU,
FLOOR IS JUST A BIDEN SUPPORTER, THAT TELLS A LOT ABOUT HIM. JOKE JOKE
CHILL OUT YOU GUYS IT IS NEARLY CHRISTMAS BE JOLLY AND HAVE A BEER ON ME.
YOU VERY LIKELY ARE AMERICANS BE KIND TO EACH OTHER.

Offline captainpecan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: RESSURECTED TINMAN NEW INVENTION.
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2021, 11:00:32 AM »
CHILL OUT YOU GUYS IT IS NEARLY CHRISTMAS BE JOLLY AND HAVE A BEER ON ME.
YOU VERY LIKELY ARE AMERICANS BE KIND TO EACH OTHER.


Exactly!!!


Back to topic. If I adjust the test design slightly, I have most of what I need to try and see if I can replicate the effect. Really all I am missing is the scale which maybe I can find a cheapo fish scale at walmart that would suffice so I don't have to wait for shipping at this time of year. Also finding steel of sufficient thickness to hold all of the flux of both magnets and cancel the repulsion. I'll have to play around with that.


Here is what I am thinking to attempt to replicate his test results assuming my current materials. I have a bunch of 1/2" by 1/2" n52 cylinder magnets that are surprisingly strong for their size. I think they may work well for this test. Now visualize the design being axial instead of radial. In other words, instead of the curved metal piece being vertical and screwed to the side of the flywheel, instead screw a flat piece down to the top of the flywheel protruding out. This eliminates the need to curve it. It now allows a magnet placed below it and above it with the ability to easily adjust the gap smaller or larger by raising and lowering the magnets as he appears to greatly multiply the effect lessening the gap. After all, it seems the only really important part is to get that magnet, plate, and gap setup proper to replicate the multiplying effect. I THINK. If the test is successful, and the upper magnet is replaced with the electromagnet now vertical, it will then allow a plate positioned ABOVE the electromagnet, and magnet above it as well. Thus using the opposite side of the electromagnet and effectively doubling the entire effect with the same single pulse of the electromagnet. That's my theory anyway, assuming I can get past the first step of seeing his results. Looks simple enough of a setup though to try.

Sorry, that was a nasty rambling, I am not even sure I explained well enough to understand.


@ Floor, does this sound to you like a valid test setup that should show the same effect? It seems like it to me unless I am still not fully understanding the effect. It almost seams it would possibly even be easier to do. Any suggestions of changes before I start?


It is going to be a very busy week, but I'll try and source a digital scale locally and get started.