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: 84049
  • *Latest: Asuka

  • *Total Posts: 893952
  • *Total Topics: 15710
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 31
  • *Total: 32

Author Topic: What exactly is the problem with these devices?  (Read 13679 times)

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2007, 09:58:51 AM »
Ever heard of the Homopolar Generator? (aka homopolar dynamo, aka n-machine)
That works just fine as a motor on pure DC input. No AC at all, no switching of magnetic field polarity either.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2007, 09:58:51 AM »

Offline Honk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497

Offline Nostradamus2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2007, 11:30:14 AM »
Simply put:
Magnets which is not changing magnetism on demand, cannot induce rotation or work. An electro motor is working because of the change of magnetism. All electromotors, even those running on DC-power supply are in fact AC-motors inside because they allways are able to change magnetic polarity as they rotate. That's why they work, and permanent magnet motors does not work.
If you even add loads of energy into DC electro magnets, as long as the magnetism does not change, they will just consume energy without doing any work. So how to make a permanent magnet motor to work, is to me a big puzzle.

But never give up. It's very educating to learn about magnets and magnetism, even if you should fail in your projects.

Br.

Vidar

You can switch iron or any other ferro-magnetic material On / Off with permanent magnet like current in electromagnet, so the right question is how to get more energy than put in ?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2007, 11:30:14 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2007, 12:07:15 PM »
No you cannot "switch ferromagnetic material on" using a permanent magnet!
There is nothing to "switch on".
Ferromagnetic material conducts magnetic flux better than other material, which is why the permanent magnet sticks to it.
When you remove the magnet, the magnetism in the frromagnetic material drops away.
To remove the magnet from the ferromagnetic material needs energy.

The only thing I can think of that might come close to what you are suggesting and that might work,
is a so-called adiabatic energy pump;
you could take a ferro bar, soft iron would be fine, and wrap a coil around it. Now have some current run through the coil and the bar will be magnetised.
Take the cirrent off the coil, and the bar will lose its magnetism. If properly done and tuned exactly right, you might be able to intercept the drop back to 'natural' unmagnetised state of the magnetic domains inside the ferro as tiny e/m fluctuations, then aligns them all using a weak field again, then have them drop back to normal unaligned domains at natural 'polarisation', etc etc, and keep intercepting the weak fluctuations...
In theory and properly done (I realise my description of it isn't very good ;)) you should be able to absorb a small temperature gradient from the environment this way, and with some luck that might even be more than the energy you lose in resistance etc.

Offline Nostradamus2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2007, 12:17:21 PM »
No you cannot "switch ferromagnetic material on" using a permanent magnet!
There is nothing to "switch on".
Ferromagnetic material conducts magnetic flux better than other material, which is why the permanent magnet sticks to it.
When you remove the magnet, the magnetism in the frromagnetic material drops away.

Go back to school, learn physics ! Have you heard about BH curve ?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2007, 12:17:21 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2007, 12:48:39 PM »
What?

The BH curve does not change the fact that you are NOT "switching on" iron or whatever ferromagnetic material by simply sticking a permanent magnet onto it!

Perhaps YOU should go back to school.
Or maybe stay away from your school, rather, if that is the place where they taught you that sticking a magnet onto metal "switches" it "on".

You can of course magnetise iron using a permanent magnet, but that involves slightly more than merely sticking a magnet onto it. You will need to heat or kinetically shock the soft iron while subjected to a magnetic field for the iron to "pick up" on it and become 'permanently' magnetic itself. If you don't, the iron will lose its magnetic polaritation naturally.

No matter how much you dislike that, it is true.

Offline Nostradamus2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2007, 02:06:30 PM »
I see where is misunderstanding, by "switching on" I mean B movement as reaction on external H field, and as I see you mean permanent magnetization of material where B<>0 when H is zero. In any case if B is not zero this mean this piece of ferro-magnetic have own magnetic field which can attract or repel other magnetic materials, so I called this "on" state

By the way with external field H you can move not only iron also any permanent magnet along its BH curve, you can prove it by measuring, repulsion force between two magnets is always weaker than attraction.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2007, 02:29:11 PM by Nostradamus2 »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2007, 02:06:30 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2007, 02:51:02 PM »
Ah, now I see where you're going.
Sorry about that earlier hickup, clearly a misunderstanding.

Indeed attraction appears to exert greater force than repulsion between two pm's.
Interestingly, this has often been stated by various researchers...
"The pinciple of attract-attract instead of the normally used principle of attract-reject is a much more efficient way to induce motion in a permanent magnetic motor, and the way to OU." or similar statements have been made multiple times by various people in the OU pmm field...
It seems they are suggesting that the use of a homopolar magnetic field instead of a dipolar (like the "AC" based motors stated earlier in this thread) for use in a pm motor/generator has a stronger effect and can therefore produce more effective output. In other words, they seem to suggest that setups which use only the attraction to "pull" the rotor around may be considerably more efficient than setups which also use the rejection to "push" the rotor around as well.
Clearly, if you spotted the force difference between the two, you will understand what they mean.

Offline Low-Q

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2007, 12:41:49 AM »
Actually, you don't need to switch polarity in a motor to create work.
You can design the motor to let a magnetic rotor chase a rotatating electromagnetic field.
This will just cause pull on the rotor, but not any push.
Just like any electric motor but efficiency and power density is dropped due to the missing push.
But still there is work being created. No need for AC fields, just switch the electromagnets ON and OFF.

That's right. Swithing it on and off will do, but then you still have a relative polarity swap, but then around a polarity offset other than zero. The relative forces are the forces that do work, and utilizing both polarities, makes a more efficient motor.

Br.

Vidar

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2007, 12:41:49 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Ed build coral castle using a T1 Ford Flywheel invented by John Keely
« Reply #24 on: December 05, 2007, 01:19:15 AM »
G'day Roen and all,

Keely said once in his writings (about 120 years ago) "No arrangement of magnets can ever be so graduated as to induce rotation"

Perhaps he was right.

Keely understood magnetism perhaps more than anyone before or after him. He managed to make non-magnetic materials magnetic by subjecting them to a sonic stream using acoustic resonators only. He also managed to take the magnetism out of very strong magnets by subjecting them to the same type of energy.

This has not been replicated to date but at the time was witnessed by a great many people, including eminent scientists.

Hans von Lieven

But he was much to knowledgeable to reason in absolutes without reason.

"No arrangement of magnets can ever be so graduated"

He doesn't say it cant be constructed, he says it cant be measured as~such with the graduated parrots being the main paroteers propagating the lie perpetually.

http://keelynet.com/interact/arc_1_98-7_98/00001350.htm

The gossip of Ford wearing off his stalkers using magnetic repulsion (haha) really goes confirmed by Ed using only car parts to build coral castle.

With MIT failing to fix Ed's door and finding a mysterious disk sitting on a Ford T1 bearing.

So now we can teach students it's made of unidentifyable material.

Isn't that a super interesting phenomenon in it self???

Would the kids accept it really is unidentifyable? I think some crackpot child may ask if that was the best we could do? no?

Then they can say "if you would know enough physics you would know this material can not be identified"  The parrotism is strong in this kind of slogans.

Didn't you learn it was made of unidentifyable material? Well stop trying to identify it?  haha??

I know it sounds really weird logic.

Well here we have the same:
Ah, but that's the wrong question.  You should be asking why people think these motors should work.

As you have been instructed to ignore perpetual motion with all media effort one could possibly utilise to make a person ignore something.

To me this means it is EXTREMELY obvious they are trying to cover up the truth. Where the truth would be exactly the opposite of the ADVERTISEMENT SLOGAN.

That alone should be all the reason you need to assume the exact opposite is in fact the truth!

So you use your curiosity to tell me my effort will be fruitless because you can prove you never questioned the divine truth about it and because you never thought about it this means you are the expert on the subject.

ROFL!!!

The brain enslaved minions of the establishment. That's how I know those devices work. I also know that general denial is the least productive activity one could engage into.

Einsteinian physics claimed no perpetual motion device could be build. So they never looked at any of them.

Now the fact they didn't look should support their original claim?

If you show them one they will call you a lunatic. Data is irrelevant in science!!!! Hallelujah!

Meanwhile in the real world the original claim still goes unsupported. the biggest nonsense of it all is that   closed systems do not exist. It's an imaginary universe.

The temperature changes all day, that's pure energy. There is plenty of sun and wind. Every particle is a magnetic perpetual motion device.

And there is so much radio activity everything shakes violently.

FFS! It's just like Galileo with his telescope.

Apparently they don't have to see magnetic fields to be able to make all kinds of weird but baseless claims about it. How dare you question our weird and baseless claims, we are scientists you should show much respect to us. Lets waste your time talking about how you are waisting your time.

I think magnetic flux looks like this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n1_6x3kEP8

Every university in the world didn't order one of his lenses.

They cant be graduated to look tough them either, they already know!

Yeah, right!

ROFL!

Offline nightlife

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1080
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2007, 06:05:55 AM »
Here is some more info on the 1903 Model A engine. I also have some pictures but I dont know how to post them.

FORD MODEL "T" MAGNETIC MODIFICATION


"Report that the 1st run batch of Model T engines could be modified to run
without fuel using self-sustaining magnetic repulsion.


-> Model T Magnetic Engine - 04/06/97
->Information that linked John Keely to Henry Ford, Sr.


The Model T used a hand-cranked magneto starting system to provide the spark
that exploded the gas to move the pistons. This is how a lawnmower produces
the spark needed to keep its engine running. The flywheel had very strong
magnets embedded in it. The bell housing that surrounded the flywheel had
coils of wire which would produce a nasty high voltage spark when the flywheel
rotated the magnetic field past the coils. This spark is what ignited the
gasoline in the cylinders. The magneto type starting system had to be hand
cranked to get the motor running, and the burning gasoline would keep it
running once started.


The first year model T's built by Ford had a special flywheel and housing that
was said to have been designed by John Worrell Keely and sold to Henry Ford.
Ford bought the design as a form of insurance because of all the harassment
he was getting from vested interests not wanting to see him succeed. After
20,000 to 30,000 cars went out, Ford was threatened by oil and gas interests
trying to coerce him to shut down production. It was not made clear who these
forces were or why they were trying to put Ford out of business.


After the first year of manufacturing Model T's, efforts were renewed to shut
Ford down. At this point, Ford then gave THEM an ultimatum, either leave he
and his family alone OR "He would send every Ford Model T owner a set of cow
magnets which fit in special slots that were cut into the bell housings on the
first year run of cars". This bell housing was cast into the engine block and
not a separate unit as on modern vehicles.


The flywheels were the hand cranked units having Vee magnets. They were
magnetos that when cranked, moved the magnets past a coil to produce a very
high voltage/current to spark the plugs. It produced a vicious spark.


Once the cow magnets were placed in the slots, the hand crank was turned and
the flywheel would spin on its own, generating up to 40 HP and completely self
running. You had to get the flywheel spinning to a minimum rpm before the
magnetic drive effect would take place.


Ford told his opponents that all Model T owners would then be running their
cars for FREE, not requiring any gasoline or other fuel. And that the
principle would be copied and applied to all machinery. Once Ford's opposing
forces verified the truth of this, "THEY" instantly ceased all attempts at
intimidating Ford and his company succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.


My contact said there were three fellows who got wind of this story several
years ago. They secured a first-run Model T and found it did indeed have
strange slots on the bell housing. Magnets were inserted and when they cranked
it, the flywheel began to spin on its own.


Based on this initial verifying experiment, they eventually produced a 40hp
version which was self-running, using the same magneto system. A demonstration
was scheduled in a larger city and two of the men drove the prototype to the
demonstration, the third man was ill and could not attend.


The demonstration went off without a hitch and was enthusiastically received.
Plans and contacts were made for duplicating the prototype for further tests
that would be followed by marketing.


As the two men were driving home late that evening with their prototype, their
vehicle was run off the road. The next day, their vehicle was found overturned,
both bodies lying in a ditch with their throats slit and the prototype was gone.


The third man who had been too ill to attend the demonstration packed up
everything and went into hiding. Word is, this man is still alive, very
paranoid, yet he has not given up on the principle and has gone even further in
his development of the principle.


Ford intended the Model T to be run on ETHANOL, not gasoline, because it was a
renewable fuel. This could have been the bone of contention with the gas/oil
companies.


The original vehicle produced in 1903 was the Model A, of which about 1,700
were produced.


Henry Ford Sr. was born July 30th, 1863 and died on April 7th, 1947. Keely
died in 1898. So there is a nearly a 40 year period when they could quite
possibly have known each other. Ford did make trips to Manhattan and being of
an inventive mind would have heard of Keely, who was written up in many papers
and magazines from 1872 until his death in 1898. It is not too much of a
stretch to envision Ford attending one or more of Keely's many public demon-
strations (as did Tesla who I have NO DOUBT copied much of Keely's discoveries
using electric current instead of mechanically produced vibrations.


The various claims for PMMs (perpetual motion machines), whether magnetic or
gravity driven, always require a restorative kick to keep it running.


A flywheel or weighted arm mounted on a horizontal shaft so that it rotates in
a vertical plane, will fall by the force of 'gravity' and inertia will push it
past the 180 degree point and up to about 270 plus degrees. At that point,
you have to use a 'kicker' to push it past the 360 degree point so that the
rotation will perpetuate. Just like pushing someone on a swing, if you time
your pushes just right, you can drive them in ever higher arcs and eventually
over the 360 mark.


The Model T engine used a weighted crankshaft, that was why the vehicles would
vibrate from side to side due to the inertial kick of the weight. I am also
told that these engines could also idle at very low rpms, something on the
order of 100 or so revolutions per minute. This story is definitely out there
but should be fairly easy to prove.


Perhaps someone out there has access to a Model A or a Model T and can examine
the bell housings on these vehicles. At this point, I think the weighted
crankshaft would be necessary to the operation of the magnetic engine since it
would provide the restorative force.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2007, 06:05:55 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline eavogels

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
    • FDP
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2007, 11:00:14 AM »
So my question is what is problem with these devices?  What is the one thing that keeps them from becoming main stream?  I?m 18 years old I sometime in the future plan on building my own.  I think that one day this could work.

I think that the problem with these devices is the perfection while doing replications. I can very well see in my own devices that often a less balanced wheel, that has it's 1 gram heavier point exactly on the right spot, performce better than a 100% perfectly balanced wheel.
Often are the devices that actually work not the best mechanical art works: magnets are handheld or glued with tape. The fact that tape is more or less flexible, can be the most important part of the device.

When replicating they are some things that destroy the basic idea:
1. Often are replicaters people that during replicating are building in their own idea's, because they think they understand exactly how the device works.
2. Some replicators use Fred Flinstone technique.
3. Some replicators are building High Tech devices, and thereby removing all the things that made the device run (like the bad tape)

At the end everyone starts to disbelieve the real inventor since often the inventor is not able to replicate his own device anymore.

Regards,
Eric.

Offline ignilc

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #27 on: December 07, 2007, 06:35:49 AM »
Self rotating magnetic devices can be built. I have built one, it rotates freely ;)

Offline eavogels

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
    • FDP
Re: What exactly is the problem with these devices?
« Reply #28 on: December 07, 2007, 09:27:10 AM »
Self rotating magnetic devices can be built. I have built one, it rotates freely ;)

Hi.
Is that a device you want to share information about?
/Eric

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Ed build coral castle using a T1 Ford Flywheel invented by John Keely
« Reply #29 on: December 07, 2007, 01:39:10 PM »
Einsteinian physics claimed no perpetual motion device could be build. So they never looked at any of them.

Now the fact they didn't look should support their original claim?
I fear you misunderstand. Einsteinian physics does not claim perpetual motion is impossible;
Einsteinian physics is simply an extension of the preceding physics systems.
It is the "laws of nature" that state that perpetual motion or "free energy" in principally impossible.
And Einsteinian physics respects the "laws of nature".

Also it is not true that they never looked at any claimed perpetuum mobile.
From quite early recorded modern history claims have been made and studied of various perpetuum mobile.
None of them were proven to actually work, or at least none of them that the public was told about.
Examples are the "Peringeus wheel" and the "Bessler wheel".

And don't forget that a lot of known principles of physics were also not applied; the steam engine for example was known in ancient Greece already, but only applied industrially about 2000 years later. Even though industrial use was suggested by Archimedes already.
You talk as if perpetuum mobile have been suppressed structurally... Do you think the steam engine was actively suppressed?

Quote
If you show them one they will call you a lunatic. Data is irrelevant in science!!!!
Really? Since when? What proven OU devices have actually been studied then?

Quote
Meanwhile in the real world the original claim still goes unsupported. the biggest nonsense of it all is that   closed systems do not exist. It's an imaginary universe.
Ah. Well, yes and no. Obviously there is always some connection with the rest of reality, even in a closed system. But you have to admit that a closed circuit  consisting of a battery, a wire, and a LED for example clearly contains the current flow that causes the LED to light up inside itself, and can be considered in that aspect to be a system closed off from the outside? So closed systems do exist, in a way.
Your point is that open systems have the possibility to harness energy that is available outside the systems internal machinery/mechanisms.
That is obviously true. But are those systems acually OU? If we include the existence of wind, for example, in our description of the system, then the system becomes closed once again. The wind may power a windmill, which puts out energy that we did not put into the device outselves. From that view, a windmill in OU because we do not input any energy ourselves, but we can use the output, and the output is more than what we input. But is we consider that wind is moving atmosphere, and if we include the entire atmosphere including naturally occurring winds into our description of the system, then the system already contained the energy because it already contains the wind, and even though the energy may be focussed and transferred by the windmill into a form that we can use more readily than the motion of air, the system only puts out energy that was actually already present in the wind. So if we look at it that way, we again have a closed system with a COP < 1.
Yes, that is energy which occurs naturally in natures physical processes, and yes, we can use that energy like we do in windmills.
No, that is still not over unity.

Quote
The temperature changes all day, that's pure energy. There is plenty of sun and wind.
And where does that energy come from, ultimately? From the fusion reactions inside the sun, and the gravity of the planetary and solar masses.
When that runs out, in millions of years, the system will halt. The energy source will be depleted. Clearly not over unity nor free energy.

Quote
Every particle is a magnetic perpetual motion device.
Oh really? So you claim magnetism is responsible for the fact that atoms do not implode? Interesting view.
Doesn't accord with science, which usually brings forward the weak and strong nuclear forces to accomplish that,
but still interesting view. ;)

 

OneLink