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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83907
  • *Latest: Vi

  • *Total Posts: 524046
  • *Total Topics: 15602
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 9
  • *Total: 14

Author Topic: flux laminator  (Read 20094 times)

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2007, 07:32:27 PM »
Quote
(http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/flux-switching/text/flux-laminator/2.png)

Now the steel strip is not attracted to the magnet at the right. It's trying to induct 2 different fields at the same time. I just place a strip on the domain wall then move another magnet over the strip. As soon as the slightest field is inducted into the strip it forcefully moves off the wall.

If you induce a field along the domain lines such as in this picture, the steel will repel itself to one side or the other, because it does not want to have both sets of flux lines cutting each other like that, they would rather travel in the other direction towards the magnetic poles.

Not entirely, the domain wall is easy to find. The opposing induction cancels it self out.

Quote
In actuality if you were able to hold the magnet Precisely ON the line there would not be a force in either direction as they would balance out,

the inducted flux from the right balances out close to zero.

If the magnet at the left would not be there the other magnet would ignore the strip entirely (try it)

BUT BUT! the moment flux IS inducted into the strip(by other means) the forces from the flux at the right do compliment each other.

You understand?

The magnet doesn't induct a field anymore but it does still have that field of it's own. So when we use other 3rd party means to induct a field into the strip THEN both of those fields can interact. They don't interact in a contradicting but in a complementary fashion.

The big discovery: The fact the magnet doesn't induct a field on it's domain wall doesn't mean it doesn't have a field of it's own. The moment we create a pole on this spot it will absolutely interact with the other poles.

A metal strip does nothing but holding a magnet on the domain wall creates torque.

Quote
but in practice you cannot find a line that infinetesimally small so you are more to one side than the other, which pushes the steel into either the N or the S field.

But it's easy to find, and it's easy to see how attraction drops off over 90 degrees. The induction and the magneto interaction are 2 different things you see? The interaction demands a field inducted into both bodies, but there is no rule that says it has to induct this field it~self. Any inducted field will do?

lol, I don't know how to explain this? I'm doing a horrible job? What do you think I'm talking about?  ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: flux laminator
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2007, 07:32:27 PM »

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3339
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #16 on: September 16, 2007, 09:35:56 PM »
wha ti am saying is, if oyu have a free moving ferro-magnetic material that approaches a magnet on its domain-line, that line is infinitely smaller than the physical object you are approaching it with.
 in fact, you must apply considerable force (per flux line) to hold the object "on" that line. it wants to pull to one side or the other.

WHICH SIDE??  that depends on which side of hte line you are holding it on, you are ot holding it "on" the lline.

you cannot, not with your hands, and i doubt we could achieve this with an exact measured line, and computerized steppermotors..  especially if the mol count on one half of your metal object is greater than on the other. (mass dispursion) - which cannot be felt/seen without extremely sensitive equipment.

Whne you induce a secondary field into the ferromagnetic object, on the opposite end from the original magnet all you are doing is setting up opposing polarities within the length of the object.

If your secondary magnet is North side facing the bar, the end of the bar becomes south and tries to make the other end of the bar N.  Now if you are near the center of the poles of the first magnet the flux lines are not very dense, it may take a stronger magnet or a longer bar to overcome the effects of the secondary magnet. Once you get it arranged where the primary field actually effects the bar, then all you have is a S pole magnet near the center of the poles of the first magnet.  if you are slightly to the N side it will push to the S, if you are slightly to the S side it will pull towards that end.  If the secondary magnet produces stronger flux lines at the end of the bar that is nearest the first magnet, then the bar wont feel much effect at all. (assuming the bar is not physically attached to the second magnet.

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #17 on: September 17, 2007, 01:30:44 AM »
wha ti am saying is, if oyu have a free moving ferro-magnetic material that approaches a magnet on its domain-line, that line is infinitely smaller than the physical object you are approaching it with.

It's irrelevant, the strip moves over the domain wall from one pole to the other, losses are roughly equal to the gain. IT becomes a pole for a moment. That's all. Anywhere near the wall the inducted fields subtract but the forces are actually doubled. We get less induction and 2 times the magnetic force there.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: flux laminator
« Reply #17 on: September 17, 2007, 01:30:44 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline xpenzif

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • myspace
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #18 on: September 17, 2007, 04:40:15 AM »
you can just use a solid donut and hold the other magnet behind it it appears. Laminated would be better of course.

One question, on your definition of "laminated" do you mean laminated as in having layers of steel strips or, "laminated" as in you would coat the steel with a plastic or other material.

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #19 on: September 24, 2007, 07:07:46 PM »
I was referring to just strips, I have no idea how a solid donut or coated strips would preform. I'm sure putting some coating on the strips is a good idea to try however. :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: flux laminator
« Reply #19 on: September 24, 2007, 07:07:46 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Low-Q

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2838
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2007, 07:28:09 PM »
Now I don't have the stuffs to test this theory.
If it hasn't been tested I wouldn't yet call it a theory.

Anyways, it would be nice if magnets worked like this, however I agree with sm0ky2 that the magnets should be attracted to the steel strips regardless of polarity. You can try this experiment to verify it:
(http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/7161/magdi3.jpg)
The magnets will still be attracted to the steel regardless of the other magnet's presence.
At a critical distance between two equal poles, an iron plate between them will cancel out all forces by attracting to the magnets at the same time as the poles are repelling each other with equal force. If we call this state the "critical state", it should be possible to fight sticky points.

Br.

Vidar

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #21 on: September 25, 2007, 10:26:42 AM »
Now I don't have the stuffs to test this theory.
If it hasn't been tested I wouldn't yet call it a theory.

Anyways, it would be nice if magnets worked like this, however I agree with sm0ky2 that the magnets should be attracted to the steel strips regardless of polarity. You can try this experiment to verify it:
(http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/7161/magdi3.jpg)
The magnets will still be attracted to the steel regardless of the other magnet's presence.
At a critical distance between two equal poles, an iron plate between them will cancel out all forces by attracting to the magnets at the same time as the poles are repelling each other with equal force. If we call this state the "critical state", it should be possible to fight sticky points.

Harper's New Monthly Magazine (March 1879, pp. 601-605)

The way I see it sticky points are not the problem, the device needs to generate torque. If it gets stuck we can always put a flywheel on it or a row of flux laminators. :P

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: flux laminator
« Reply #21 on: September 25, 2007, 10:26:42 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline xpenzif

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • myspace
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #22 on: September 26, 2007, 01:12:21 AM »
I'm sure putting some coating on the strips is a good idea to try however. :)
How would a coating help?

If it gets stuck we can always put a flywheel on it or a row of flux laminators. :P

A flywheel probably wouldn't help this design since you have to sacrifice energy to maintain the spin of the flywheel.

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #23 on: October 09, 2007, 04:40:05 AM »
I'm sure putting some coating on the strips is a good idea to try however. :)
How would a coating help?

Look, you have to use something to separate the strips. Air is not the best magnetic insulator. I'm talking about trying things.

You are confused how trying things helps?

Quote
If it gets stuck we can always put a flywheel on it or a row of flux laminators. :P

A flywheel probably wouldn't help this design since you have to sacrifice energy to maintain the spin of the flywheel.

Look, if you don't understand why the flywheel is used then it doesn't mean it doesn't help.

What kind of help are you offering anyway?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: flux laminator
« Reply #23 on: October 09, 2007, 04:40:05 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline xpenzif

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • myspace
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2007, 05:48:11 AM »
Look, you have to use something to separate the strips. Air is not the best magnetic insulator. I'm talking about trying things.

You are confused how trying things helps?

I guess you can "try" everything, and then find out that there's no such coating that can effectively insulate your steel strips from the magnetic field.

Look, if you don't understand why the flywheel is used then it doesn't mean it doesn't help.

What kind of help are you offering anyway?

Would I be of more help if I told you that all your ideas have no flaws and should not be questioned? ::)
« Last Edit: October 10, 2007, 10:09:50 AM by xpenzif »

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #25 on: October 10, 2007, 10:54:56 PM »
Quote
Would I be of more help if I told you that all your ideas have no flaws and should not be questioned?

I would want you to cooperate with me so that we can build free energy machines. ;D Then you would be the most of help. Ideas should be expanded upon. Please use the other half of your brain.  8)

I try to explain my thoughts on the topic for a whole year but I have not found a good way to get my ideas across to anyone. I'm not the one doing something wrong here. I'm about as stubborn and in the face as a person can get.

IMHO the perpetual motion device seems to be the inferior discovery in this.

In this very~same sentence I prove your ideas really are fantastic xpenzif.  ::) Just build upon them rather then take them apart yourself. In this topic you should try to figure out why I think the fluxlaminator is an interesting device to study.  There is no point for me to try to advance my hypothesis in public if the replies are non constructive. but but but but .. as you can see I have fully engaged in this kind of pointless disclosure of my thoughts. Not so much to advance my theory but more to review the review process. If it was just me there would be nothing wrong. The thing is, the non constructive replies make it uninteresting for any researcher or inventor to share anything. 99% doesn't have a clue how brilliant their thoughts are. Your plan to tell people their idea has no flaws would be quite motivating. The researcher's effort depends fully on his or her motivation. Where the motivation comes from isn't important. You are free to motivate them as much as you like actually. This would actually work. You can stop questioning this though, there need not be found any flaws.  :)

You have constructed a prophetic self fulfillment closed loop assembly.

All you have to do is chant the mantra and it will work.

You are a genius!

 ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: flux laminator
« Reply #25 on: October 10, 2007, 10:54:56 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #26 on: October 10, 2007, 10:55:19 PM »
Quote
Would I be of more help if I told you that all your ideas have no flaws and should not be questioned?

I would want you to cooperate with me so that we can build free energy machines. ;D Then you would be the most of help. Ideas should be expanded upon. Please use the other half of your brain.  8)

I try to explain my thoughts on the topic for a whole year but I have not found a good way to get my ideas across to anyone. I'm not the one doing something wrong here. I'm about as stubborn and in the face as a person can get.

IMHO the perpetual motion device seems to be the inferior discovery in this.

In this very~same sentence I prove your ideas really are fantastic xpenzif.  ::) Just build upon them rather then take them apart yourself. In this topic you should try to figure out why I think the fluxlaminator is an interesting device to study.  There is no point for me to try to advance my hypothesis in public if the replies are non constructive. but but but but .. as you can see I have fully engaged in this kind of pointless disclosure of my thoughts. Not so much to advance my theory but more to review the review process. If it was just me there would be nothing wrong. The thing is, the non constructive replies make it uninteresting for any researcher or inventor to share anything. 99% doesn't have a clue how brilliant their thoughts are. Your plan to tell people their idea has no flaws would be quite motivating. The researcher's effort depends fully on his or her motivation. Where the motivation comes from isn't important. You are free to motivate them as much as you like actually. This would actually work. You can stop questioning this though, there need not be found any flaws.  :)

You have constructed a prophetic self fulfillment closed loop assembly.

All you have to do is chant the mantra and it will work.

You are a genius!

 ::)

Offline xpenzif

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • myspace
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2007, 12:07:44 AM »
There need not be found any flaws?
If I see a flawed design I will try to pinpoint the problem. This(hopefully) brings the problem to the creator's attention. The creator can then try to modify the design to avoid the problem, or he can call my findings "non constructive," ignore any comments that disagree with his design, and quite possibly build it, only to find out I was right.

As far as advancing your hypothesis in public, I see no problem with it. Quite often in research you end up proving your hypothesis wrong.

Anyways, if I told you your idea has no flaws I would be lying to you, and thus being non-constructive.

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #28 on: October 11, 2007, 08:00:21 AM »
There need not be found any flaws?
If I see a flawed design I will try to pinpoint the problem.

It works the other way around. When you see any design then you start looking for things wrong with it. Of, course you are going to find things that are wrong if that is what you are looking for. Imagine what happens if you are only interested in finding things wrong about something? What happens if this is what the effort goes towards?  It's awfully boring to be at the receiving end of such. It's unprofessional enough to fear it.

Quote
This(hopefully) brings the problem to the creator's attention.

The only problem I can think of is all of us being dead in 10 years if we don't find an alternative fuel source,  petroleum is a completely unworkable tech. I figure we don't need additional imaginary problems, we need your solutions.

If you don't want to be dishonest you will need to grant this hypothetical device a minimal chance to work exactly as described until you understand how it exactly works. Then after that we look for ways to make it work better together. ;) Imagine what happens if you would in stead limit your effort to negative comments on the constructive efforts of others, your effort would work against your own goals. Not saying you are; any effort towards trying to shoot holes in stuff will accomplish just that and only that.  You would do much better if you would start searching for ways to improve a concept specially when it doesn't work. You will succeed at that just as easy as looking for problems. Find 1 "problem" at a time then you search for the answer yourself. The contrast between both aproaches should be very obvious, just stay focused on the end results.

You don't want to take the energy problem seriously until you personally suffer right? But are you not suffering already? I thought nature had warned us more then enough by now? We are in deep shit you know? And we cant really expect the rest of mankind to do anything sensible about it now can we? They pretty much gave up already? ha-ha?

Quote
The creator can then try to modify the design to avoid the problem,

I think you don't understand the device? Right? Until you and me have figured out a way to advance this it's just not a time for you to question it. I'm not saying you are not capable of finding 100 000 things wrong with everything you see. Heck, you can go with the sticky point stories, equilibriums, energy conservatoriums, noethren's thoerems. oh, there are so much "good excuses" for not making basic effort of understanding the topic. My personal favorite is calling the researcher a crackpot. It's one thing to think it but to actually find it worth to mention how one assumed something cant  work is just rude? The only result of such approach will be irritation.  Here science appears all to happy to leave all hope for mankind with the creators of half baked inventions while making life impossible for them amoung other factors on the long list of artifical anoyances. I really think that if one agues that blue is a pretty color then there must be other colors that are less pretty as blue. If my contraption ish no good, it's reasonable to ask in favor of what? Oil? Prayer perhaps? The after life? haha?

Quote
or he can call my findings "non constructive," ignore any comments that disagree with his design, and quite possibly build it, only to find out I was right.

It's cool for you to question the workings when you think you understand what I'm on about.

Quote
As far as advancing your hypothesis in public, I see no problem with it. Quite often in research you end up proving your hypothesis wrong.
You don't see anything wrong with the "What ever it is it's probably nothing" approach?  Peeps assume everything is probably nothing. To a very high degree it instantly becomes so. Why bother when it's nothing right? i sure wouldn't?? lol???
Quote
Anyways, if I told you your idea has no flaws I would be lying to you, and thus being non-constructive.
But just assuming flaws is also equal to lying. If you claim to have found a flaw you should describe it. Until you describe such with enough detail there are non. You are free to tell me the truth the way you observe it. So far: no flaws dectected.

overunity.com is like the top research website on the web, this obviously makes you the top researcher on this mud ball. This in it's turn means the whole world is depending on you to build them free energy machines. O well... you already know this of course, you just don't want to think about it. But lets not see you give up on us just jet mkay? 8)

ok, lets see you try focus for a moment....

you are here to find construction drawings for free energy devices (right?)

Well ok....

Q1) What does this specific inventor claim the fluxlaminator to be capable of?

Q2) How does this specific fluxlaminator device work?

Supply me with the information I need to clarify my explanation please.

Here are some links. It's my best guess for now.

Quote
PM FLUX SWITCH
ABSTRACT
Method of preventing magnetic flux from extending into a target material.
http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/text?pm-flux-switch

Quote
3 POINT INTERACTION
ABSTRACT
Unleash complimentary reactions utilizing the subtraction of contradicting actions.
http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/text/?3-point-interaction

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/wesley-gary
Wesley Gary

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/flux-switching
Flux Switching


Offline xpenzif

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • myspace
Re: flux laminator
« Reply #29 on: October 11, 2007, 09:15:34 AM »
Yeah. You're right. Your device is flawless. You solved the elusive alternative fuel source. You saved the world. Good work gaby de wilde. Build it so we can all benefit. ::)

 

OneLink