@Dave45:

Being off-topic is better than no discussion at all.  This thread was dead for a while.  Scotty brings up a good point on why an uniform field should rotate with the magnet according to the atomic domain theory.

The interesting thing is, with a radial magnet where half of one side is north and the other half of the same side is south, then the magnetic field does rotate with the magnet.  A radial magnet has no magnetic axis to spin on where the field remains stationary.

This suggests the south pole anchors itself to the north pole and the north pole anchors itself to the south pole.  When the north and south poles are on opposite sides of the magnet,  each pole is rotating in opposite directions relative to the face of the magnet.  The north pole will be rotating CW with the magnet's face and the south pole will be rotating CCW with the magnet's face, or vice versa.  The forces on each side of the magnet will cancel the fields from rotating with the magnet.  It's similar to having 2 people pull you in opposite directions with an equal force, you will remain stationary.

When the opposite poles are on the same side of the magnet, then they will rotate with the magnet because each pole is anchored to the other pole on the same side of the magnet, thus the field will rotate with the magnet.

When I first replied to this thread, I mentioned that the field may rotate with the magnet when current is flowing through the disc.  This is because the current flowing through the disc has a magnetic field and a moving electric field, but when current isn't flowing through the disc, then there is only a static electric field and no magnetic field on the disc.

Scotty says the paradox still remains.  I say Scotty's experiment is incomplete and there is no paradox as explained above. 

I've already suggested how opposite poles may anchor themselves to each other and why they remain stationary or rotating depending on how they are anchored to each other.  Why the idea that the field may rotate with the magnet when current is flowing through the disc is automatically rejected based on an experiment when current isn't flowing through the disc is beyond me.

Until it is understood why and how the magnetic field remains stationary when the magnet is rotating, then we have no idea how to manipulate this to our benefit.  I gave a possible reason to why and how it can rotate or remain stationary with the magnet, and current flowing through the disc can certainly change things due to it having a magnetic field.

Having an inverted field on the same side of the magnet will cause the field to rotate with the magnet.  This will allow the counter torque to be canceled when current is being taken off the disc.

This topic is about the paradox of the field remaining stationary.  There is no paradox.  It is common sense when it's logically thought through.  I'm trying to suggest ways to overcome the counter torque associated with drawing current off the disc by exploiting how the magnetic fields can rotate and remain stationary with the magnet.

If we can't move on from the basic elementary truths in the universe, such as understanding Faraday's paradox (not just accepting it or not accepting it, but really understanding why it remains stationary and what causes it to rotate with the magnet), then how can we understand how to manipulate those basic truths to our benefit and move on to more complex things to achieve OU.  I don't see it happening, cause we still drinking milk as babes do.  We should be eating meat by now and topics such as this shouldn't even exist on this board.  God will confuse the wise with the simplest things of this world.

GB

      When they make a permanent magnet they pass a dc current through a cooling alloy.  This creates a crystal where the magnet dipole moments of the atomic neuclei are aligned as though the current was still present.  Then before the pm is shipped they induce a very strong magnetic field though the crystal.  This energy transfer increases the intrinsic angular momentum of the atoms in the molecular matrix.  Any acceleration of mass or increase in angular momentum radiates a magnetic dipole field.  The flux of which depends on the density of the crystal and the angular momentum of the atoms distributed in the crystal.  If the mass of the pm is rotated so that it's angular momentum is the same vector as the atomic rotation there is no net change in the magnetic field radiation unless we consider the grain of the crystal and spin it at near speed of light edge velocities.  Magnetic fields are created from spinning charged mass.  If the disk is stationary and the pm is spun relative to the stationary disk it is the same as the disk spinning relative to the stationary magnet or the two spinning together.  The pm magnetic field is always the observer.  The stationary thing.  The copper mass on the edge of the disk is being penetrated by a magnetic field as is that on the core.  The acceleration relative to the pm observer field is greater on the edge of the disk than the acceleration of the copper atoms near the axis of the disk.  The radiated magnetic field is different for the faster moving atoms on the edge of the disk compared to the atoms on the interior of the disk.  This is observed by the pm magnetic field.  This changed magnetic field induces a voltage as the electrons now cycle or drift around an altered magnetic field flux.  Any current drawn through an external circuit will of course represent some more charged mass acceleration (in the mass of the disk) and another radiated magnetic field which will require input of energy from somewhere to continue the acceleration of the disk.

Some think that it is "off topic" or does not apply, but look at charged particle drifts again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guiding_center

See attached image: (first image)

The disc doesn't care if the mag field rotates or not as long as it is homogeneous.   For all we know, you could modulate this magnetic field and take the hom-gen to a new level or blow it sky-high.  Few ever get past the idea of a rotating disc, so a varying mag field never crosses their mind.

When looking to rid ourselves of the rotating disc, the question: What sort of "force" can be used in place of a rotating disc?

A "force" can be termed a change in acceleration (F=ma), or a change in "momentum", which is what acceleration is.

Momentum is P=mv/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

How do we change "momentum"?

1. Change mass or energy
2. Change the velocity
3. change the speed of light

Another way to cause particle drift is to use a non-uniform field, and it may be that non-uniform fields cause a change in momentum so that these two methods are essentially the same.

One way to change momentum is Tesla's radiant electric shockwave.  Look at Tesla's original pancake transformer: (second image)

So, what happens if you add en external field to a Tesal coil?

The disc doesn't care if the mag field rotates or not as long as it is homogeneous.   For all we know, you could modulate this magnetic field and take the hom-gen to a new level or blow it sky-high.  Few ever get past the idea of a rotating disc, so a varying mag field never crosses their mind.

I've done my share of HPG work and once experimented with your concept. I found it very aggravating to learn that modulating the mag field (I used a PRF from 0 to 250kHz) resulted in anything but what you expect. In short, it did a good job of heating the disc and not much more, whether the disc rotated or not.

This forced me to conclude the potential difference between the center and outer diameter of a working HPG was due to the difference in angular velocity between the center and outer diameter.

On the Tesla coil question: I can tell you one thing does happen.... Adding a magnetic field to such a coil increases the operating Q, to a point. Too strong a field and you have the same effect as a saturated core.

Sorry. I had a break. I'll be quiet now 

I've done my share of HPG work and once experimented with your concept. I found it very aggravating to learn that modulating the mag field (I used a PRF from 0 to 250kHz) resulted in anything but what you expect. In short, it did a good job of heating the disc and not much more, whether the disc rotated or not.

This forced me to conclude the potential difference between the center and outer diameter of a working HPG was due to the difference in angular velocity between the center and outer diameter.

On the Tesla coil question: I can tell you one thing does happen.... Adding a magnetic field to such a coil increases the operating Q, to a point. Too strong a field and you have the same effect as a saturated core.

Sorry. I had a break. I'll be quiet now 

I was getting tired of seeing people beat the ol' HPG dead horse.  It's just an eddie current brake with a load on it. 

On the Tesla coil - which coil configuration and what was the direction of the mag field?

Electric field results in both particle going the same direction and no current.

Should be able to passively use the Earth gravity field with the right configuration - simplest of which appears to be Tesla's radiant energy receivers.  Who would have thought...

@BEP:

What if we had an inner wheel and an outer wheel.  A wheel inside a wheel.  The inner wheel will rotate and the outer wheel will remain stationary.  There will be relative motion between the inner and outer wheels.  There will be a difference in angular velocity between the axis/rim of the inner wheel and the rim/axis of the outer wheel.  Connect a wire from the rim of the outer wheel to the axis of the inner wheel with a brush.  We'll also need a wire connecting the outer wheel to the inner wheel.

This is half baked, but I understand what you mean by the angular velocity between the axis and rim.  It does play a role.  I'll try to draw an illustration.

The blue stationary disc is just part of the stationary external circuit.  The magnetic field over the blue disc is there to cause the particle drift from the electric field of the red disc with less energy input requirements.  This will increase the voltage in the system due to moving through the magnetic field of the blue disc, and this increases the resistance in the system, thus an increase in voltage. 

The magnetic field over the blue disc is opposite in polarity to the red disc to avoid the counter torque.  If both discs had the same poles, then the counter torque would be there.

No comments on the illustration.  Guess that means it doesn't work.  Guess that means it can't be modified or built upon to work.  Guess I'm wasting my time.

GB