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.
 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

Custom Search

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #15 on: October 16, 2009, 10:53:29 PM »
I'm going to make this simple.  Study this, then it will be clear as day.  First thing is to forget about if the field rotates with the magnet when current is flowing or not.  Some of the reading will be tedious, but please take the time to visualize what you are reading.  Skimming over this will do you no good.

When a conductor moves through a magnetic field when there is no change in flux, the magnetic field will separate the charges in the conductor.  The separated charges creates an electric field.  The charges are separated, but they're not moving.  We need another electric field to move those charges for there to be a voltage for current to flow.

How do we create an additional electric field?  It is the relative motion between the disc and external circuit (EC).  The EC will be another disc.  The relative motion can be the disc moving CW through the field and the EC moving CCW through the field, thus they are counter rotating to each other.  Can this be done on the same axis?  Yes.  This will give us the greatest output to input ratio.  If the axle is rotating at 5,000 rpm, then it is the same as rotating at 10,000 rpm since they are counter rotating relative to each other.

When the disc is moving CW through the field at 5,000 rpm and the EC is stationary or 0 rpm, then it is equivalent to the same 5,000 rpm.  This gives us half of the output to input ratio that is possible in the system.

When the disc is moving CW through the field at 5,000 rpm and the EC is moving in the same direction CW through the field at 2,500 rpm, then it is equivalent to rotating at 2,500 rpm.  This is not a smart thing to do, but it does show how the system works.

When the disc and external circuit are both rotating in the same direction at 5,000 rpm, then it is equivalent to rotating at 0 rpm.  This gives us no voltage for current to flow and is the same as the disc and EC rotating together.

There are two ways to eliminate the back torque in the system completely and that is not using relative motion that is mechanical in nature.  This means not to have relative motion mechanically between the magnet and disc/EC.  Also not to have relative motion mechanically between the disc and EC.  This means all three must rotate together.

Now, if you look at the above example, when they all three rotate together, then it is equivalent to 0 rpm and there will be no voltage for current to flow.  This is true, but we can use this to our advantage.  I'll explain how.

When we put a disc on both sides of two Halbach Arrays with the same poles facing each disc, then we can create relative motion between the discs electrically without there being any relative motion mechanically.  I'll go into more details about this.

The disc on the left side of the Halbach will be moving CW through the field of the North Pole at 5,000 rpm and the disc on the right side of the Halbach will be moving CCW through the field of the North Pole at 5,000 rpm when the axle is rotating in one particular direction.  This is equivalent to counter rotating to each other.  When they counter rotate, this gives us the highest possible output to input ratio available.  This is the same as doubling the rpm that the axle is rotating at which would be 10,000 rpm.

Next, we put a slip ring on each disc.  Then we connect the rims of the discs together.  The best way to do this is to completely cover the two Halbach Arrays in copper similar to a nickel coated magnet.  Now we extract the current from the two slip rings.  This is using relative motion that is electrical in nature.  We have already achieved OU, but we can improve on it.

All we need to do is stack the slip rings, discs, and Halbach Arrays on the same axle and connect the slip rings in series to increase the voltage to the desired level.  Prior to this, we already increased the voltage because we doubled the rpm that the axle is rotating at.  We have also eliminated all the back torque in the system.

This is a perfect system and is OU, but nobody is listening or paying attention.

GB

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3937
« Reply #16 on: October 17, 2009, 12:26:06 AM »
ok let me try this again.....

in the example where the conductive surface is touching the entire edge around the disk, several magnetic radii are formed.
these lines are more of "arcs", that spiral outwards from the center, rather than straight radii lines. i'm attaching one of Tesla's sketches at the bottom of htis post so you can see these lines.

this is where the distortion of the magnetic field develops, and is the only part of the field that "rotates".

also, turn your set-up 90-degrees so the disks are oriented in the horizontal plane. then you will see that both disks are spinning in the same direction. polarity does not change the effects, the voltage potential of the north and south disks will be the same with respect to center / outward edges. you can connect them in series to increase the potential, or in parallel to increase the amplitude. both are valid solutions.

the reason there is less back-emf when the magnet is spinning, is because the magnetic distortion is a function of both the magnetic field AND the induced electric field. there is less "magnetic friction" when the physical magnet is also spinning, because it has nothing to "push off of" when the distortion occurs.
thus the experienced "back EMF" is almost solely the result of perpendicular circuit paths through which the current is flowing.
this can be further reduced by bringing all connections off at non-perpendicular tangents to the spinning radii.

suspend a magnetic actuator over the exposed surface of the disk, while it is spinning.  you will see "pulses" as each radii passes the actuator. the # of radii that form is a function of the size of the disk and the rate at which it spins. larger or faster spinning disks will form more radii.

heres the image that Tesla drew - he actually suggests the disk be constructed of spiraled segments to mimic these field-lines.

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #17 on: October 17, 2009, 01:40:17 AM »
ok let me try this again.....

in the example where the conductive surface is touching the entire edge around the disk, several magnetic radii are formed.
these lines are more of "arcs", that spiral outwards from the center, rather than straight radii lines. i'm attaching one of Tesla's sketches at the bottom of htis post so you can see these lines.

this is where the distortion of the magnetic field develops, and is the only part of the field that "rotates".

This won't happen in the system I have described.  The current isn't being extracted between the axis and rim.  The current is being extracted between the axis and axis.  The current will follow the return path from slip ring to slip ring.

also, turn your set-up 90-degrees so the disks are oriented in the horizontal plane. then you will see that both disks are spinning in the same direction. polarity does not change the effects, the voltage potential of the north and south disks will be the same with respect to center / outward edges. you can connect them in series to increase the potential, or in parallel to increase the amplitude. both are valid solutions.

The discs are spinning in the same direction as the axle, but they are not spinning in the same direction relative to the face of the magnetic poles.  The polarity does change the effects.  It's already been tested on this forum by lumen and Yucca.  This means if the disc is moving CW through the South Pole then the current will run from the axis to the rim.  Disc moving CCW through the South Pole then the current will run from the rim to the axis.  Disc moving CW through the North Pole then the current will run from the rim to the axis.  Disc moving CCW through the North Pole then the current will run from the axis to the rim.  Again, this has already been tested on this forum and the polarities do change and has an affect on the system in a positive way if utilized properly.

the reason there is less back-emf when the magnet is spinning, is because the magnetic distortion is a function of both the magnetic field AND the induced electric field. there is less "magnetic friction" when the physical magnet is also spinning, because it has nothing to "push off of" when the distortion occurs.
thus the experienced "back EMF" is almost solely the result of perpendicular circuit paths through which the current is flowing.
this can be further reduced by bringing all connections off at non-perpendicular tangents to the spinning radii.

The back torque can not be reduced by bringing all connections off at non-perpendicular tangents.  It doesn't matter what angle your connections are at, and this has been tested on this forum also.  Shielding has no affect either.

heres the image that Tesla drew - he actually suggests the disk be constructed of spiraled segments to mimic these field-lines.

Again, this doesn't apply to the setup I described since the current isn't extracted from the axis and rim, thus there is no spiraled field-lines, arced radii, etc.

The setup I described is not a conventional HPG.  It is designed to defeat the back torque, to eliminate the brushes or conductive belt on the rim, to increase the voltage, and the issues with polarity of the electric fields, etc.

This setup takes every possible advantage and exploits it to the fullest potential possible.

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #18 on: October 18, 2009, 03:04:39 PM »
also, turn your set-up 90-degrees so the disks are oriented in the horizontal plane. then you will see that both disks are spinning in the same direction. polarity does not change the effects, the voltage potential of the north and south disks will be the same with respect to center / outward edges. you can connect them in series to increase the potential, or in parallel to increase the amplitude. both are valid solutions.

Do you realize how difficult it would be to try and connect them in series using brushes when the voltage potential of the north and south discs are the same with respect to the center / outward edges.  It would be an engineering nightmare.  This is the reason for the north and south discs to have a voltage potential that is opposite in polarity with respect to the center / outward edges so they are naturally in series with each other avoiding the huge losses associated with brushes and the complexity of running those brushes in seres in addition to the costs of building a system such as that.

Why complicate things when there are better ways.  The thing you don't understand is the voltage potential of the north and south discs are different in respect to the center / outward edges so they are naturally in series.  You can't do it when both discs are facing opposite poles when they are on the same axis without spending a lifetime to achieve it.  This is the reason for the two Halbach Arrays or to have two magnets which are separated with enough distance so there magnetic fields don't interfere with each other.  Since the discs are on opposite sides of the magnet (the two magnets must be looked at as being a single magnet, then you will see that the two discs are on the opposite sides and will be moving through the field in opposite directions relative to each other), then both discs must rotate through the same pole in order to have a voltage potential that is opposite to each other in respect to the center and outer edges.

Yucca tested that when a disc is on both sides of the magnet, and each disc is facing a different pole, then the voltage potential will be the same on both discs in regards to center and outward edges.  If the magnet was a monopole magnet where both sides had the same poles, then the voltage potential would be opposite in regards to the axis and rim.  This is the reason why the north and south magnets must be looked at as being a single magnet.  The only difference is the distance separating them.  Two Halbach Arrays with the same poles facing outwards is a better choice, but is not necessary to prove this.

Here is lumen's video demonstrating how a change in the direction of rotation will change the voltage potential with respect to the center / outward edges.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSWwrvT_c8w .  To save time, you can start watching at the 4 minute mark of the video, then you will see how the polarity of the system changes with respect to the direction of rotation.  Changing the poles the disc is moving through will also change the polarity.

All attempts to connect the rim in series to increase the voltage has failed.  There is good reason for this, and that is the lack of understanding how the system works or how to utilize the system to it's fullest potential.

When you have two Halbach Array's with the same poles facing outwards that is sandwiched between two discs, one disc is moving through the field in the opposite direction as the other disc.  This is the same as having two counter rotating discs which is the same as doubling the rpm.  This is increasing the relative motion between the two discs, and is the same as counter rotating to each other.  Increasing the rpm is already proven to increase the voltage.

Also, each disc is rotating.  This means both discs will be cutting through the magnetic field.  This is the same as doubling the radii of the disc and magnet.  When one is rotating and the other is stationary in the conventional setups, then the one which is stationary is not moving through the magnetic field of the magnet.  Increasing the radii of the disc and magnets is already proven to increase the voltage.

The two Halbach Arrays will increase the strength of the magnetic field that is not canceled which the discs will be moving through.  The strength of the magnetic field is already proven to increase the voltage.

Stacking them on the same axle where they are connected in series with the proper configuration will increase the voltage since they are actually separate systems meaning each will have there own potential.  This would be equivalent to connecting many separate HPG's in series, which just happens to be on the same axle and operating on the same input power.  Connecting many separate HPG's in series is also proven to increase the voltage.

The homopolar's power output goes up by the 4th power of increases in the rotor radius while its input power requirement goes up by the square thereof.  This is evidence of mechanical over unity.  This is also already proven.  This means stacking them in series on the same axle will provide more power output than the input requirements if done properly.  This can not be done in the conventional setups even if stacked on the same axle, since it's not utilizing the system properly to it's fullest potential while exploiting everything I have mentioned above.  The system I have described is doing just that, and the output to input ratio will hold.

This should convert the mechanical OU properties of the HPG into electrical OU.

I am not here to spread misinformation or to mislead anyone.  The system I have described is inline with everything that is known about HPG.

Take care,

GB
« Last Edit: October 18, 2009, 06:28:43 PM by gravityblock »

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #19 on: October 18, 2009, 08:20:01 PM »
There was a guy on this forum (BWS), not sure if he still follows this forum or not, but he bolted two huge magnets together with their like poles facing each other and discs on each side.  He had a patent on this along with another patent where he was trying to saturate the discs so they could be connected in series with brushes.  The two magnets with like poles facing each other created a radial magnetic field in the middle on the rims.  This is the reason to keep the magnets separated or to use two Halbach Arrays.

Then he tried to extract the current between the axis and rim.  He got what he called cross voltage.  Now, think about this.  The discs on each side of the magnet is already connected in series and is acting as a single entity with a voltage potential between the axis and axis of the discs, with the radial magnetic field on the rims interfering with this potential.

When he tried to extract the current between the axis and rim with a stationary external circuit, this created a voltage potential that was opposite to the single entity, thus the cross voltage and defeating what he was trying to do.

He actually had 4 different voltage potentials in the system.  A voltage potential between the axis and axis which canceled each other out on one side of the disc since there was no return path to the other side while the radial field on the rims interfered with this potential, a voltage potential on one side of the disc from the axis to rim, on the other side of the disc from the rim to the axis, and another voltage potential between the axis and rim of the external circuit.

If he would have put slip rings on each side of the magnet, kept the magnets separated where their fields didn't interfere with each other and didn't create a radial magnetic field on the circumference of the discs, then extracted the current between the slip rings...... then the current would have flowed from one side of the disc to the other side without the cross voltage.  The wire connecting the two slip rings together would have created the other voltage potential that was in series between the axis and axis allowing current to flow with no cross voltage.

He understood how the polarity could be changed in regards to the center and outer edges, but he didn't understand properly how the stationary external circuit between the axis and rim would create relative motion between the disc and external circuit which would create an additional voltage potential that wasn't between the axis and axis.

Yes, in the conventional setups, the voltage potential is between the axis and rim, but when you make changes that is different than the conventional setups, then you must take this into account.  We've been taught the voltage potential is between the axis and rim, but this is not always the case.  He then convinced most that the way to connect the rims in series is to saturate the discs.  He was defending his patents at this time and distracting from ideas that would make his patents invalid.  I would say he was successful.

Here is an image of his setup.

#### broli

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2245
« Reply #20 on: October 19, 2009, 12:36:18 AM »
GB you are correct about doubling the voltage but from experience I can tell you that the counter torque will not be gone, it will actually be doubled as well.

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #21 on: October 19, 2009, 01:54:48 AM »
GB you are correct about doubling the voltage but from experience I can tell you that the counter torque will not be gone, it will actually be doubled as well.

You may be right about the counter torque being doubled as well as the voltage.  I was thinking the counter torque on the left side of the magnet would be in the opposite direction as the counter torque on the right side of the magnet, thus canceling each other out.  The counter torque on the left side should be in the opposite direction to the counter torque on the right side since the polarities of the axis are opposite on each side.  I am having a difficult time visualizing how they would both be in the same direction with each other and also in the opposite direction as the momentum of the axle in which would cause the counter torque to be doubled.  Does this make any sense?

Hope you can find the words to explain this to me.  I will think about this, cause it is a real possibility the counter torque would be doubled.

Thanks,

GB
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 02:55:40 AM by gravityblock »

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #22 on: October 19, 2009, 12:36:45 PM »
Actually, according to my estimates the voltage would be at least quadrupled as compared to a system running at the same rpm and with a disc of the same radii in the conventional setups and that is without stacking them.

I have a method that I haven't disclosed here which would increase the voltage by a factor of 100 or maybe even a 1,000 (it would be huge) utilizing the concepts I have mentioned with the same input requirements without any additional magnets being added to the system. Yes, according to experience the counter torque would increase in proportion to the voltage, but I can't figure out how that could be possible in this setup.  I may be wrong though.

There is no reason to disclose this, since what I am saying isn't understood or accepted by anyone here which could build a model for proof of concept.  I do plan on building this, but it may take me years before I can pursue it due to financial and other reasons.

If the concept is proven with a working model, then I will disclose it.  It will surely work if the concept is proven.  It will not work in the conventional setups.

#### broli

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2245
« Reply #23 on: October 19, 2009, 12:43:40 PM »
Just finished making an illustration that shows the forces at play. The perspective isn't correct but it's done to aid visualization. These forces aren't usually talked about, even stronger they mostly claimed to exist on the disc and magnet which are glued to each other. This would make newton role in his grave. But using ampere's old force law it can be derived easily. Since action equals reaction in the strong form unlike the imaginary weak form.

#### Nikola Tesla

• Newbie
• Posts: 25
« Reply #24 on: October 19, 2009, 01:12:32 PM »
There is an old hypothesis that gravity would cause the electrons in a conductor to "sag" very slightly downward, producing a slight potential difference between the top and bottom of the conductor.

The essential problem is that electric forces areso much stronger than gravitational ones that even quite tiny electrical effects overwhelm the expected gravitational effect.

I have taken a long piece of single wire and i started spinning it above my head like the blades of a helicopter.
The idea here was to see if i could force the electrons down the wire.
It certainly proved to be an intresting experiment and i did measure a definite potential diffrence between the center connection of the spinning wire and the earth connection.

Offcource, it would be quite hard to connect to the outer end of the spinning wire to measure the closed loop potential, but this could be done by making the connection touch something like an outer metal ring.

Then the setup would start to look like the farady experiment, but only with a "fragmented" disk so to speak.
I have always thought that the centrifugal force playes a major part in high speed rotating homopolar generators.
In theory the electrons are constantly forced to move to the outer end of the disk, creating a potential diffrence between the center and outer place on the disk, which is exactly what happens.

If the certrifugal force is strong enough to force the electrons through a strong magnetic field, the result would indeed be a strong current between the center and outer area of the disk, so it's certainly a possibillaty.

Nikola.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 01:38:48 PM by Nikola Tesla »

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #25 on: October 19, 2009, 02:44:14 PM »
@broli:

If I have this correct, the counter torque is proportional to the amount of current that is being taken off the disc.  Drawing more current will produce more counter torque and drop the output voltage in the system.  I don't see the counter torque being proportional to the output voltage in the system.  I see the counter torque dropping the output voltage in the system that is proportional to the current being taken off the disc.  If we can get the system to have a high voltage, then we should be able to draw more current from the system than a lower voltage system with the same input requirements.

Also, if the input requirements would increase to the square thereof in order to maintain the same rpm and voltage due to drawing current off the disc, then the output power will increase to the 4th power (if we draw 8 watts off the system, then it would take much less than 8 watts of input to maintain the same rpm and voltage).  We can only achieve this if we can increase the voltage in the system with the same rpm or input requirements, and the system I am talking about does just that.  This is an OU machine.  We just have to learn how to use it properly.  We may not be able to overcome the counter torque, but this doesn't mean we can't have OU in the HPG.

Maybe I am misunderstanding this.

@Nikola:

What is responsible for the centripetal force that moves the electrons from the rim to the center with the correct direction of rotation and magnetic pole?  There is no centripetal force in the system that could do this.  This would suggest that the centrifugal force doesn't have a role in moving the electrons in the HPG since the same rpm's produces the same output with either polarity.

GB
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 05:31:28 PM by gravityblock »

#### Nikola Tesla

• Newbie
• Posts: 25
« Reply #26 on: October 19, 2009, 03:49:44 PM »
I offered a very simple experiment anybody can do that shows that the (free) electrons are moving when the metal is rotated at high velocity.

If you are not going to do the nessessary experimentation, Please, ignore all of my work, aswell as the experiment and it's results,
And Please, do not post messages telling me why you think it cannot work like that.

There will be some people who see the importance of my test results over what somebody else is thinking, and they might eventually decide to try the experiment i described in my previous post.

What do you think will happen to these kids when we spin the disk faster and faster?

Nikola.

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #27 on: October 19, 2009, 04:37:24 PM »
I offered a very simple experiment anybody can do that shows that the (free) electrons are moving when the metal is rotated at high velocity.

If you are not going to do the nessessary experimentation, Please, ignore all of my work, aswell as the experiment and it's results,
And Please, do not post messages telling me why you think it cannot work like that.

There will be some people who see the importance of my test results over what somebody else is thinking, and they might eventually decide to try the experiment i described in my previous post.

What do you think will happen to these kids when we spin the disk faster and faster?

Nikola.

The kids will fly off the disc of course.  I do believe the centrifugal force can move the free electrons from the axis to the rim, but what is going to move the free electrons against the centrifugal force from the rim to the axis for current to flow.  It is not the centrifugal force.

So, the force that moves them back to the axis is working against the centrifugal force.  I would speculate that if there was no centrifugal force in the HPG, then the output power would be slightly higher because it wouldn't require additional energy to work against the centrifugal force in order to move those charges back to the axis for current to flow.  The centrifugal force may be a slight hindrance in the HPG.

I do see the importance of your test results and I am not ignoring your work.  If you have any ideas on how we can exploit your test results to have a positive effect in the HPG, then please share.

GB
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 05:19:06 PM by gravityblock »

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #28 on: October 20, 2009, 11:17:20 AM »
@broli:

The diagram you drew is not correct.  Please consider this.

Look at the black arrows on each disc showing the disc's direction of rotation.  The black arrow on the left side is pointing in the CW direction and the black arrow on the right side is pointing in the CCW direction (it's a mirror image and this is throwing everyone off and is where relativity comes into play).  This means the discs are moving through the stationary magnetic fields in opposite directions through like poles.  The EMF on each disc is in the opposite direction or polarity.  This means the counter torque is in the opposite direction on each side, thus canceling each other.  The counter torque is always in the opposite direction to the EMF.

Another way to visualize this, is to cut your image straight down the middle.  Place the left magnet on a table where the blue side is facing down and do this with the right magnet where the blue side is facing down.  Now compare the black arrows.  You will see they are pointing in opposite directions, thus the counter torque on each side will be pointing in the opposite direction and this cancels the counter torque while the EMF on each disc are in series to increase the voltage and power output.  This is sooooooo beautiful.  It's like poetry in motion.

GB
« Last Edit: October 20, 2009, 01:14:41 PM by gravityblock »

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3287
« Reply #29 on: October 20, 2009, 03:41:11 PM »
@broli:

We are both wrong.

In the system I am referring to, the voltage potential of the whole system is between the axis and axis.  This is our rotating frame of reference.

The stationary wire that is running from the axis to axis is our stationary frame of reference which gives us a voltage potential in the opposite direction or polarity than our rotating frame.  This provides a return path to the other side for current to flow.

Now, we also have two other rotating frames of references, the left disc and the right disc.  We also have two other stationary frames of references, the magnetic field on each side.  The voltage potential is again between the rotating frames of the disc and the stationary magnetic fields.  Let's say the counter torque between the left disc and magnetic field is CW,  then the counter torque between the wire and axis on the left side will be CCW, thus canceling each other out.  This happens on both sides.

What do you think?

GB
« Last Edit: October 20, 2009, 05:15:03 PM by gravityblock »