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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity  (Read 14573 times)

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« on: February 17, 2009, 09:16:22 AM »
According to wikipedia:

"Magnetic pole model: Although for many purposes it is convenient to think of a magnet as having distinct north and south magnetic poles, the concept of poles should not be taken literally: it is merely a way of referring to the two different ends of a magnet. The magnet does not have distinct "north" or "south" particles on opposing sides."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet

I had come to this conclusion on my own and the wikipedia article suggests this also (although I realize wikipedia is not always correct). This is total confusion to what is taught and what really is.

Let's analyze the flow of current:

On the topside of the loop, the current is flowing from left to right or from west to east. On the bottom side of the loop, the current is flowing from right to left or from east to west. So, according to the above circuit, the flow of current is changing direction or polarity. This is not correct. The current flow is still moving in the same direction relative to the topside and bottom side of the loop and has the same polarity. I think most of us will agree with this.

It is the same in a magnet. The magnetic field doesn't have a north or south pole. The magnetic field is still moving in the same direction regardless of what side it is flowing from or flowing to. If the North pole side has a clockwise spin, then the South pole side will have a counter-clockwise spin relative to each other. Although the spins are different relative to each other, the magnetic field is still moving in the same direction and have the same polarity. The spin will determine which direction the magnetic field of flux will flow from or flow to relative to each other.

The conclusion is it may be convenient to refer to a magnet as having a north and a south pole, we must realize this only refers to the different ends of the magnet and does not mean a magnet's north pole side has a different polarity than the south pole side.

This is total confusion to what is taught and what really is.

I truly hope I am not the author of confusion here. Please correct me if I am wrong, cause I am wrong more than right.

#### CARN0T

• Newbie
• Posts: 43
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2009, 06:02:13 AM »
Hello, Gravityb,

I found your thoughts to be very interesting.  I am reminded that an electric dipole does have two charge centers spaced apart.  And, as you say, a magnetic dipole does not.

Funny, that on the outside, an electric dipole and a magnetic dipole have exactly the same type of field properties.  But on the inside, they are entirely different.

Ernie Rogers

According to wikipedia:

"Magnetic pole model: Although for many purposes it is convenient to think of a magnet as having distinct north and south magnetic poles, the concept of poles should not be taken literally: it is merely a way of referring to the two different ends of a magnet. The magnet does not have distinct "north" or "south" particles on opposing sides."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet

I had come to this conclusion on my own and the wikipedia article suggests this also
----<SNIP>----
I truly hope I am not the author of confusion here. Please correct me if I am wrong, cause I am wrong more than right.

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2009, 05:05:34 PM »
Hello, Gravityb,

I found your thoughts to be very interesting.  I am reminded that an electric dipole does have two charge centers spaced apart.  And, as you say, a magnetic dipole does not.

Funny, that on the outside, an electric dipole and a magnetic dipole have exactly the same type of field properties.  But on the inside, they are entirely different.

Ernie Rogers

They are only different on the inside in regards to each other because we're not doing it right. Do it right and they'll be the same on the inside and outside.

When you create an electric field from a magnetic field, then the electric field will have a counter emf to the magnetic field that created it because they are not relative to each other, meaning no perpetual state of movement between their infinities.

Another way to say this, is the north and south poles have a field that are relative to one another, thus they are not in opposition to each other, meaning they are in a perpetual state of movement within their own infinity.

It is the same way with an electric field. The negative and positive sides are not in opposition to each other. The field is moving in the same directions relative to each other, meaning they are in a perpetual state of movement within their own infinity. (Whaaaaaaaaaaaat)

Because the electric field was created from the magnetic field and the two fields are not relative to each other, this breaks the perpetual state of movement between the two different infinities.

Create an electric field that is not in opposition to the induced magnetic field that created it, then we can have overunity because their will be a perpetual state of movement between both infinities (the two infinities will become one).

This is what broli and I are working on. We believe it is possible to have a stationary coil to rotate the magnets where the magnet is rotating on its magnetic axis so that the magnetic field doesn't change.

Since the magnetic field doesn't change, then there is no counter emf. No counter emf means Lenz's law does not apply.

Remember it is the spin of the electrons orientated in the same direction as not to oppose each other that creates a permanent magnetic field in a permanent magnet. Since the electrons can do this, we can do this also. We are doing it now, but doing it wrong.

We make a coil of wire that aligns more of the electrons in the coil of wire to have the same spin similar to a permanent magnet, but then we use a magnet in the wrong way to create another emf field that opposes the spin of the electrons (this is stupidity if you really think about it. This is not the way the electrons are doing it in a permanent magnet....LOL).

Why would we create a coil that aligns more of the electrons in the coil to have the same spin and then later oppose this spin by using the magnet wrong? When we decide to do it right and use the permanent magnet so it can rotate on its magnetic axis or another method so it doesn't create a counter emf, then we'll have a permanent magnetic motor similar to a permanent magnet and have overunity. Don't say we can't do this because the electrons in a magnet are doing it right. Why can't we? We can do it right once we forget everything we've been taught about conversion of energy.

Please note I may not be using the term relative in its proper terms, but you should get the idea if you study this.

Oh, I apologize for being repetitive in what I'm saying. I am doing this so it will stick in your mind. I'm trying to undo all the years of being brainwashed with wrong theories and concepts. If you don't think this theory is right, then you can ignore it. Hopefully this theory can be proven to be correct, then you will have to accept it and will be happy that it is correct.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2009, 09:10:40 PM by gravityblock »

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2009, 10:36:24 PM »
A brief side note on the term of overunity:

I have used this term in previous posts. I want to clear this up before someone throws the conservation of energy and other laws at me.

When I have used this term, I am referring to an unlimited amount of energy for output that is available to us in the system.

Let's say the system has 100 units of energy available for output. This means we can't use more than 100 units of energy continuously or at any given time.  This does mean we can use 100 units (minus heat losses, etc.) of energy continuously. The important thing to remember is the heat losses and other losses does not lower the amount of energy in the system. It only lowers the amount of energy that is available to the system.

When you have an overunity motor then the total amount of energy that is available to you at any given time is the total amount of energy available in the system. The total amount of energy in the system will always be available to the system for output but not more than that at any given time. This does not break the conservation of energy or any other known and well established laws.

How do we make more energy available to the system at any given time:

1) More turns of wire in the coil.
2) Make the core bigger with the right materials.
2) Bigger and stronger permanent magnets.
3) Using materials that have the highest magnetic permeability known, etc.

I think you get the idea.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2009, 10:11:52 AM by gravityblock »

#### CARN0T

• Newbie
• Posts: 43
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2009, 01:36:23 AM »
They are only different on the inside in regards to each other because we're not doing it right. Do it right and they'll be the same on the inside and outside.

Would you care to illustrate your point using the HF molecule, which has a strong electric dipole moment?

Ernie Rogers

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2009, 07:42:03 AM »
Would you care to illustrate your point using the HF molecule, which has a strong electric dipole moment?

Ernie Rogers

I'm not sure an illustration is necessary since the the dipole moment is simply a measure of how strong the charges involved are and how separated they are. Since you're referring to a molecule and not just a particle such as an electron, we must take into account the bond dipole moment.

The HF molecule is polar by virtue of polar covalent bonds - in the covalent bond electrons are displaced towards the more electronegative fluorine atom.

The Bond Dipole is two atoms in a bond, such that the electronegativity of one atom causes electrons to be drawn towards the other, in turn causing a partial negative charge. There is therefore a difference in polarity across the bond, which causes a dipole moment.

Forget about polarity. Forget about north and south poles. Forget about negative and positive. The things I asked you to forget, they should only be used as a reference point (Relativity BS that causes confusion). The bottom line is electrons always have a negative charge. The path the electrons are taking inside magnets are in an infinite loop that are not in opposition to each other. Same thing with the HF molecule. Same thing in a coil.....until we have it rotate a magnet improperly.  Take a magnet and hit it several times with a hammer, this will cause the electrons inside the magnet to align themselves in a way that they are in opposition to each other, thus you lose your magnetic field. Now the magnet is no longer a magnet and can no longer convert energy.

There are two things we need to know. How to align more of the electrons to take the same path. We do this correctly. How to have the electrons in a circuit to rotate a magnet that doesn't create a counter emf. We don't do this right. I am saying it can be done because the electrons are doing it inside a magnet without losing its magnetic field unless an outside force causes it to re-align in opposition with each other.

When the electrons are in opposition to each other, their magnetic fields get canceled out. When they cancel each other, then you have no net force. Same thing when you have a coil where the wire is wrapped in opposite directions to each other, thus canceling each other out with no net force.

« Last Edit: February 19, 2009, 12:59:56 PM by gravityblock »

#### CARN0T

• Newbie
• Posts: 43
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2009, 05:10:50 PM »
. . . .
The HF molecule is polar by virtue of polar covalent bonds - in the covalent bond electrons are displaced towards the more electronegative fluorine atom.

The Bond Dipole is two atoms in a bond, such that the electronegativity of one atom causes electrons to be drawn towards the other, in turn causing a partial negative charge. There is therefore a difference in polarity across the bond, which causes a dipole moment.

Is there an electric field within the bond?  Which way does it point?
Quote
. . . .
Take a magnet and hit it several times with a hammer, this will cause the electrons inside the magnet to align themselves in a way that they are in opposition to each other, thus you lose your magnetic field. Now the magnet is no longer a magnet and can no longer convert energy.
. . . .

When you hit it with a hammer and it loses its field, does it lose energy?

Ernie Rogers

#### Creativity

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 266
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2009, 07:14:59 PM »
A brief side note on the term of overunity:

I have used this term in previous posts. I want to clear this up before someone throws the conservation of energy and other laws at me.

When I have used this term, I am referring to an unlimited amount of energy for output that is available to us in the system.

Let's say the system has 100 units of energy available for output. This means we can't use more than 100 units of energy continuously or at any given time.  This does mean we can use 100 units (minus heat losses, etc.) of energy continuously. The important thing to remember is the heat losses and other losses does not lower the amount of energy in the system. It only lowers the amount of energy that is available to the system.

When you have an overunity motor then the total amount of energy that is available to you at any given time is the total amount of energy available in the system. The total amount of energy in the system will always be available to the system for output but not more than that at any given time. This does not break the conservation of energy or any other known and well established laws.

How do we make more energy available to the system at any given time:

1) More turns of wire in the coil.
2) Make the core bigger with the right materials.
2) Bigger and stronger permanent magnets.
3) Using materials that have the highest magnetic permeability known, etc.

I think you get the idea.

what is unity and underunity then?

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2009, 07:52:17 PM »
@ CARNOT:

Short answer to all those questions, is I don't really know. I will give you my best guesses.

I believe an electric dipole moment would point from the negative charge towards the positive charge (Fluorine pointing towards Hydrogen) with the electron being displaced towards the fluorine atom.

I believe there is an electric field within the bond. It may be a static electric field, but then that is in regards to a particular frame of reference, so in another frame of reference it may not be static (LOL - either the thing is changing or it is not....but in physics it can do both at the same time - LOL).

It doesn't lose energy after hitting it with a hammer. The energy is still there, just no net force. Remember energy and mass are interchangeable (E = MC2).

Excellent questions. Even if I don't know the answers, it gets me to think.

"They say the day you stop thinking is the day you die."

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2009, 09:04:29 PM »
what is unity and underunity then?

Underunity is what we're doing now. You get less energy out of the system at any given time than what is available to the system at any given time (with or without a load). Need a continuous input of energy. Not able to get to the creator of it's infinity with or without a load. Does not break any known physic laws.

Unity is breaking even. You get the same energy out of the system as you put into the system at any given time without a load. You still have to provide a continuous input of energy when there is a load. Able to get to the creator of it's infinity without a load but is less than the creator of it's infinity with a load. Does not break any known physic laws.

Overunity is providing energy out that is equal to or less than the total amount of energy available to the system at any given time with or without a load and a continuous input of equal energy that came out of the system. Able to get to the creator of it's infinity with or without a load and becomes one with the creator of it's infinity but can't be greater than it's creator. Does not break any known physic laws.

Over-over unity is getting more out of the system than what is available to the system at any given time with or without a load. Able to get to the creator of it's infinity with or without a load and becomes greater than the creator of it's own infinity. Breaks many laws of physics.

I tried not to bring infinity into this, but it makes it easier to understand, at least for me.

#### CARN0T

• Newbie
• Posts: 43
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2009, 09:57:31 PM »
@ CARNOT:
"They say the day you stop thinking is the day you die."

In that case, we may just live forever.

Ernie Rogers

#### gravityblock

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3280
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2009, 10:09:13 PM »
In that case, we may just live forever.

Ernie Rogers

The question is, will we have any of our sanity left from all this thinking.

#### broli

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2246
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2009, 01:56:40 AM »
This is really an interesting topic as it shows tat magnetic fields are completely unintuitive. If you indeed consider it to be two monopole particles like electrical charge you'll soon find out the part in between them does not match

Below is an interesting comic I made that will challenge your knowledge. (Best open it in a separate window/tab)

Everyday I feel like a kid that rediscovers the outside world. I feel like I have gotten wiser but have learned nothing at the same time. The knowledge anyone posses is a mere drop in the ocean of knowledge.

#### CARN0T

• Newbie
• Posts: 43
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2009, 03:48:20 AM »
Hello, Broli,

Your electric dipole field looks fine.  Do you remember this Maxwell equation?

div B  =  0

One meaning is that the magnetic flux lines don't terminate.  Even with a permanent magnet, the lines must continue through the center to form complete loops, similar to the field within a coil.

Ernie Rogers

#### broli

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2246
##### Re: The author of confusion: North/South Poles and Polarity
« Reply #14 on: February 23, 2009, 10:56:12 AM »
I don't see gaus's law like that. Instead of saying the flux is zero it says more that...you can never enclose a magnetic monopole. The dipole will always end up out of the enclosed surface thus making the flux zero. This makes sense because a magnetic dipole are not two particles like gravity block said. But they are more one entity. A magnetic dipole is thus misnamed and should be named magnetic moment to stop the confusion. But this doesn't mean a magnetic monopole doesn't exists.