PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-06-27, 13:11:48
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
Author Topic: Do permanent magnets " DO " work?  (Read 6482 times)
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
Dear Brad and all.

May I draw your attention to this post over at OU?

http://overunity.com/15307/lenz-free-generator/msg490292/#msg490292

Curious?

Cheers Grum.

Yes ,i seen that one Grum,and would be an interesting experiment--but where to get such a glass rod?.

The current understanding of the magnetic field makes no sense at all. How dose a flow of virtual photons attract or repel another flow of virtual photons  C.C-->it makes no sense at all. Mow,we might accept a flow of virtual photons exiting two magnet's causing an apposing force-like two air hoses blowing out compressed air trying to be force together,but the !south! pole makes no sense using this analogy. It would be like having two vacuum cleaner hoses being brought near to each other,where this flow of virtual photons is entering the south pole of the magnets. So why do the south poles repel each other,when the !so called! flow would cause them to be attracted to each other--just like the two vacuum cleaner hoses would be if bought close together(while the vacuum's are running of course).

What makes sense to me,is a displacement of positive and negative charges-positive charges from one pole of the magnet,and negative charges from the other pole of the magnet. Now we have something that makes sense,as like charges repel,and unlike charges attract  O0.

This !virtual photon! stuff just dosnt make any sense,and i think it more a decoy than anything that has any solid background to back it up. Virtual photons can only appear in the context of a direct interaction between charged particles--so what are these charged particles ?.

As i said,i believe that the two poles emit negative and positive charged particles,and the !virtual photon! foowy is nothing more than a bi product of this charged field.

Could the PM be a self sustaining generator that is simply always shorted out?.

From Enjoykin at OU


There is our small experimental setup: Take a glass tube. Clean it from greased sweaty hands with alcohol. Now rub one end of a glass tube with synthetic fabric, and suspend it for the middle by means of a rubber flagella to a rack and bring at in vicinity permanent magnet near the polished end of glass tube.

1. Is there exist any kind of ineraction or force between test electrostatic charge/s (electron/s) in close proximity of southern or northern permanent magnet poles ??

Guys now do the same, but with non polished end.

2. Any interaction or not ??

To undesrtand any electro-magnetic paradox it was quite necessary to understand on prime experiment does the electrostatic test charge and a magnet interact among themselves


So if we charge this glass rod with a static charge,and we bring either pole of a PM close to that charged glass rod,and it either attracts or repels the glass rod--what dose that tell us?.
If either happens(an attraction or repulsion),then we know that the magnetic field of a PM is indeed a flow of negative and positive charges of some type--maybe nothing more than a static charge that is constantly shorted,and where the motion of the atoms within the magnetic material is producing a constant charge for this continual short.



Brad
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749

So if we charge this glass rod with a static charge,and we bring either pole of a PM close to that charged glass rod,and it either attracts or repels the glass rod--what dose that tell us?.
If either happens(an attraction or repulsion),then we know that the magnetic field of a PM is indeed a flow of negative and positive charges of some type--maybe nothing more than a static charge that is constantly shorted,and where the motion of the atoms within the magnetic material is producing a constant charge for this continual short.
Brad

You have to remember that any object, be it a PM or not, will interact with the electric field emanating from that charged rod.  The object will be electrically polarized and hence will endure electrostatic forces on it.  IMO that is what you will see, it will have nothing to do with the magnetic field.  If the PM is moving, like you wave it about, then the charge on the rod will get a force from the induced E=v X B electric field.  Nothing new there.

With regard to virtual photons, their flow is not along electric field lines or magnetic field lines.  Those lines are just math constructs, nothing is actually flowing along them.  The lines merely represent the direction of a force that would occur on a test charge (or a test monopole) placed there.  The actual force that you get on the test charge comes from (a) the interaction of that charge with virtual photons coming from all directions of space that cause it to jitter about spatially over tiny distances on the Planck scale (Heisenberg uncertainty) and (b) the effect of nearby charges which modify the virtual photons arriving from their direction so that instead of those jitter forces averaging out to zero they average out to a force in a certain direction.  If those nearby charges are static we call the resulting static force "electric".  If those nearby charges are moving we get a different force where we call that difference "magnetic".

Smudge
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1532


Buy me a cigar
Some thoughts.

Glass tube.

Perhaps a cleaned up length of dead fluorescent tube. You can reduce the risk of getting cut by gently heating the ends with a Propane torch.

Magnet.

An electromagnet would surely be an interesting test. I can see where Smudge is coming from as moving a mass of anything near an electrically charged object would create movement. But if a coil was placed on an Iron core and held rigidly opposite magnetic polarities could be tried.

Footnote.

I ended my full time working career as engineering manager for an importer of far eastern machine tools. One day a gentleman was looking at a lathe in the showroom and we started talking. Turns out he had retired from one of her Majesty's research establishments.....  ;) You know what I mean?  I had one of " he who shall remain nameless " SSG devices on display. He kind of winked and said.... Once mankind solves the riddle of Magnetism and Electrostatic effects our energy problems will be solved forever..... It gave me the very great impression that...... they already had!!

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
You have to remember that any object, be it a PM or not, will interact with the electric field emanating from that charged rod.  The object will be electrically polarized and hence will endure electrostatic forces on it.  IMO that is what you will see, it will have nothing to do with the magnetic field.  If the PM is moving, like you wave it about, then the charge on the rod will get a force from the induced E=v X B electric field.  Nothing new there.

With regard to virtual photons, their flow is not along electric field lines or magnetic field lines.  Those lines are just math constructs, nothing is actually flowing along them.  The lines merely represent the direction of a force that would occur on a test charge (or a test monopole) placed there.  The actual force that you get on the test charge comes from (a) the interaction of that charge with virtual photons coming from all directions of space that cause it to jitter about spatially over tiny distances on the Planck scale (Heisenberg uncertainty) and (b) the effect of nearby charges which modify the virtual photons arriving from their direction so that instead of those jitter forces averaging out to zero they average out to a force in a certain direction.  If those nearby charges are static we call the resulting static force "electric".  If those nearby charges are moving we get a different force where we call that difference "magnetic".

Smudge

I cant agree with this Smudge,and i think we are missing something that should be obvious.

Lets look at the homopolar generator.
Here we have a situation where the magnets can rotate with or without the conductor,and either the polarity of the magnets on either side of the conductor !or! the conductors direction of rotation,determines the voltage polarity of the conducting disc.

As a change in rotational direction alone can change the direction of electron flow through the disc,without changing the magnetic field,must mean that the magnetic field alone dose not determind  the direction of force on a charge.

I still believe that the magnetic field itself-is the charge.

Perhaps some one could explain as to why the polarity of the conductor of a homopolar generator reverses when the direction of rotation of the disc is reversed?.


Brad
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 215
I've often wondered if the electron locked that creates magnetism has a reference point of sorts to what orientation the output voltage is created by the discs directional rotation. If we assume that each electron has a relatively fixed attribute then this attribute will have a positive or negative effect on the magnetic spin either in a positive or negative way respect to the velocity of the spin itself.
If the discs spin goes against the natural direction the relative difference would be greater. If there exists in all matter a fixed reference where a stationary disc keeps an equilibrium the output voltage will be zero.
Thoughts.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
I cant agree with this Smudge,and i think we are missing something that should be obvious.

Lets look at the homopolar generator.
Here we have a situation where the magnets can rotate with or without the conductor,and either the polarity of the magnets on either side of the conductor !or! the conductors direction of rotation,determines the voltage polarity of the conducting disc.

As a change in rotational direction alone can change the direction of electron flow through the disc,without changing the magnetic field,must mean that the magnetic field alone dose not determind  the direction of force on a charge.

I still believe that the magnetic field itself-is the charge.

Perhaps some one could explain as to why the polarity of the conductor of a homopolar generator reverses when the direction of rotation of the disc is reversed?.


Brad
The polarity of the current in the conductor is determined by the velocity direction.  Reversing the velocity reverses the current.  Fleming's right hand rule.  And of course the velocity direction relates to the rotation direction.  So maybe your question should be how does movement through a magnetic field induce a current into a conductor?  And that comes down to exactly what is a magnetic field?  Or what is an electric field?  I have this vision that space is full of particles traveling at the speed of light and in all directions.  These particles have zero rest mass but they do have momentum.  If they happen to collide with a matter particle (like an electron) then the matter particle gets a force impulse.  Collision is perhaps the wrong word, they get absorbed by the matter particle.  A stable matter particle can't continually absorb so it also emits.  Now we have two force impulses, one at absorption and one at emission.  Clearly the first force has a direction that coincides with the arrival direction of the space particle.  The second one does not necessarily have that alignment, it depends on which direction the emission takes place.  That direction is determined by, among other things, the spin carried by the arriving particle.  The net effect of many space particles interacting with the electron can achieve an average force in a given direction, and that direction can be set by the nature of space particles that have been emitted from a nearby electron.  Those space particles, or virtual photons to give them another name, emitted from an electron, carry information in their spin direction that not only tells you the polarity of the emitting electron (or positron or any charged particle) but also its velocity direction.  So you can get the situation where a moving stream of electrons alongside a non-moving array of positive ions induce force onto a nearby electron that is entirely related to the velocity direction of the electrons.  Without that array of positive ions we would see not only the so called magnetic effect (we call it a field) but also the electric field, but they both have a common origin.

Smudge   
 
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
The polarity of the current in the conductor is determined by the velocity direction.  Reversing the velocity reverses the current.  Fleming's right hand rule.  And of course the velocity direction relates to the rotation direction.  So maybe your question should be how does movement through a magnetic field induce a current into a conductor?  And that comes down to exactly what is a magnetic field?  Or what is an electric field?  I have this vision that space is full of particles traveling at the speed of light and in all directions.  These particles have zero rest mass but they do have momentum.  If they happen to collide with a matter particle (like an electron) then the matter particle gets a force impulse.  Collision is perhaps the wrong word, they get absorbed by the matter particle.  A stable matter particle can't continually absorb so it also emits.  Now we have two force impulses, one at absorption and one at emission.  Clearly the first force has a direction that coincides with the arrival direction of the space particle.  The second one does not necessarily have that alignment, it depends on which direction the emission takes place.  That direction is determined by, among other things, the spin carried by the arriving particle.  The net effect of many space particles interacting with the electron can achieve an average force in a given direction, and that direction can be set by the nature of space particles that have been emitted from a nearby electron.  Those space particles, or virtual photons to give them another name, emitted from an electron, carry information in their spin direction that not only tells you the polarity of the emitting electron (or positron or any charged particle) but also its velocity direction.  So you can get the situation where a moving stream of electrons alongside a non-moving array of positive ions induce force onto a nearby electron that is entirely related to the velocity direction of the electrons.  Without that array of positive ions we would see not only the so called magnetic effect (we call it a field) but also the electric field, but they both have a common origin.

Smudge   
 

What has velocity in relation to the magnetic field,when that field is uniform?

Second-there is no movement in relation between the conductor and magnetic field-in regards to the homopolar generator.
So,with regards to the homopolar generator,there is no velocity or motion  between the disc and magnetic field. The !force!is centrifugal,but that direction of force remains the same regardless of rotational direction.

The only motion is between the disc and pickup brushes.


Brad
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
The disc is a conductor and all parts of the disc except its centre are moving with a velocity proportional to the radius.  If you had a wheel with spokes then each spoke is a length of wire that is moving across the magnetic field.  You could have a wheel with a single spoke going to a conductive rim and you would get the same voltage induced.  The disc is simply a lot of spokes all merged together.

Smudge
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
The disc is a conductor and all parts of the disc except its centre are moving with a velocity proportional to the radius.  If you had a wheel with spokes then each spoke is a length of wire that is moving across the magnetic field.  You could have a wheel with a single spoke going to a conductive rim and you would get the same voltage induced.  The disc is simply a lot of spokes all merged together.

Smudge

Smudge

If the magnets are fixed to the conducting disc,there is no motion between the magnetic field and disc,as both have the same reference point to each other at all times,regardless if they are rotating or not,and so there is no velocity between the magnets and disc. There is only velocity between the disc and pickup brushes.

So once again,this being the case,why dose the polarity change with a change in rotation direction?.

Look at the sketch below,where we remove the brushes from the system-->will the resistor dissipate power in the form of heat,if the disc,magnets,and resistor are spun together?.

Do you have-or can you provide evidence of such a test to back up your answer ?


Brad
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
In fact guys,why dont you all have a shot at this question.

Will a voltage develop across the resistor,if the resistor is spun with the disc and magnets ?.

Brad
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
Smudge

If the magnets are fixed to the conducting disc,there is no motion between the magnetic field and disc,as both have the same reference point to each other at all times,regardless if they are rotating or not,and so there is no velocity between the magnets and disc. There is only velocity between the disc and pickup brushes.

Ah, you believe that the field is somehow fixed to the magnet.  Let's have a thought experiment.  Let's imagine the magnet is a glass tube filled with some fluid, and it is the fluid that is responsible for the magnetic field.  The fluid is actually rotating whirling around at enormous constant RPM driven by some external force,  And it is that fluid movement that actually creates the magnetic field.  Now I think you will agree that if we rotate the glass tube at some trivial RPM it will have no effect on the field.  If we have a rotating disc that gets induced voltage from that field, it matters not whether the glass tube rotates with the disc.

What you see as the magnet is really only the matrix that carries the spins responsible for the field.  It is what you don't see that creates the field, and what you don't see are those billions of spins.  The field from those spins is in no way altered when the matrix is rotated.  It matters not whether the disc rotates separate from the magnet or attached to it.  Now the answer to your original question, if the disc rotates the same way as the spins you get one polarity, and if it rotates the opposite way you get opposite polarity.

Smudge
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
In fact guys,why dont you all have a shot at this question.

Will a voltage develop across the resistor,if the resistor is spun with the disc and magnets ?.

Brad

No, the voltage induced across the disc is negated by the voltage induced across the resistor and the wires.

Smudge
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
No, the voltage induced across the disc is negated by the voltage induced across the resistor and the wires.

Smudge

OK Smudge-a question.

Which disc would develop a greater voltage in the same circumstances/homopolar generator.
1- A copper disc @
2-A stainless disc ?
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 215
In fact guys,why dont you all have a shot at this question.

Will a voltage develop across the resistor,if the resistor is spun with the disc and magnets ?.

Brad
.

No, the resistor is fixed in the field so there's no difference in the spin velocity of the magnetic moment induced in the disc. No difference in velocity nulls the output. A stationary resistor brushing the rotating disc is another story.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
.

No, the resistor is fixed in the field so there's no difference in the spin velocity of the magnetic moment induced in the disc. No difference in velocity nulls the output. A stationary resistor brushing the rotating disc is another story.

Hi szaxx

Can you supply a link to the experiment that backs up your theory ?
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
OK Smudge-a question.

Which disc would develop a greater voltage in the same circumstances/homopolar generator.
1- A copper disc @
2-A stainless disc ?
If there is no current being drawn then the two different discs will show the same voltage.

Smudge
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 215
Hi szaxx

Can you supply a link to the experiment that backs up your theory ?

I've not found anything that shows what we discussed way back in the 70's.
However the basics are the same for induction if viewed from the perspective that field lines (for want of a better term) are threads with a magnetic spin oriented in the same direction. Stronger magnet, more lines so to speak. Each one is capable of inducing current flow into a loop of a passing conductor. This induction is determined in polarity by the direction of the spin. All straightforward and accepted given the lack of modern terms.  A disc in a homopolar generator is many loops as already mentioned.
As the loop intersects these lines it hits the outer edge of the spin before passing through the centre then leaving the line. When the line is completely inside the loop there's no additional charge induced as equilibrium is reached. It's this 'entering' the spin that denotes the current polarity and the amount of power induced is increased with the strength of the field. If the loop is reversed in direction the polarity changes. We assumed that the electron flow would be dependant upon spin direction by the electrons locked creating the field.

Feel free to test this, it's the only interpretation we agreed upon.

The link provides a few pointers although it uses current rather than electron spin. It has pics which make it easier to comprehend.
https://skullsinthestars.com/2014/08/27/physics-demonstrations-faraday-disk/
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
I've not found anything that shows what we discussed way back in the 70's.
However the basics are the same for induction if viewed from the perspective that field lines (for want of a better term) are threads with a magnetic spin oriented in the same direction. Stronger magnet, more lines so to speak. Each one is capable of inducing current flow into a loop of a passing conductor. This induction is determined in polarity by the direction of the spin. All straightforward and accepted given the lack of modern terms.  A disc in a homopolar generator is many loops as already mentioned.
As the loop intersects these lines it hits the outer edge of the spin before passing through the centre then leaving the line. When the line is completely inside the loop there's no additional charge induced as equilibrium is reached. It's this 'entering' the spin that denotes the current polarity and the amount of power induced is increased with the strength of the field. If the loop is reversed in direction the polarity changes. We assumed that the electron flow would be dependant upon spin direction by the electrons locked creating the field.

Feel free to test this, it's the only interpretation we agreed upon.

The link provides a few pointers although it uses current rather than electron spin. It has pics which make it easier to comprehend.
https://skullsinthestars.com/2014/08/27/physics-demonstrations-faraday-disk/

szaxx and Smudge

OK,here are some truths about the homopolar generator.
First up,you need to see the brushes and external circuit as the stator part of the generator.
Neither the disc or magnets need to rotate in order to generate a DC current. There need only be motion between the disc and external circuit(including the brushes)in order to produce a current flow.

So,in simple terms,the disc and magnets can remain stationary,and the brushes and external circuit can be rotated,and a DC current will be produced the same as if the disc it self were rotating.

szaxx
This can only mean that the following is not correct
Quote:A disc in a homopolar generator is many loops as already mentioned.
As the loop intersects these lines it hits the outer edge of the spin before passing through the centre then leaving the line. When the line is completely inside the loop there's no additional charge induced as equilibrium is reached. It's this 'entering' the spin that denotes the current polarity and the amount of power induced is increased with the strength of the field. If the loop is reversed in direction the polarity changes. We assumed that the electron flow would be dependant upon spin direction by the electrons locked creating the field


It would seem to me that the production of current is more due to the leading and trailing velocity between the disc and the external circuits point of contact to the disc-that being the brushes.

Once again--both the disc and magnets can remain stationary(no velocity of the disc through the magnetic field),and the brushes and external circuit can be rotated around the disc,and the same DC current will be produced.

Something to think about.


Brad
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1754
Everyman decries immorality


Buy me a beer
Something to think about.

Do you understand what Smudge said ?

Ah, you believe that the field is somehow fixed to the magnet.  Let's have a thought experiment.  Let's imagine the magnet is a glass tube filled with some fluid, and it is the fluid that is responsible for the magnetic field.  The fluid is actually rotating whirling around at enormous constant RPM driven by some external force,  And it is that fluid movement that actually creates the magnetic field.  Now I think you will agree that if we rotate the glass tube at some trivial RPM it will have no effect on the field.  If we have a rotating disc that gets induced voltage from that field, it matters not whether the glass tube rotates with the disc.

What you see as the magnet is really only the matrix that carries the spins responsible for the field.  It is what you don't see that creates the field, and what you don't see are those billions of spins.  The field from those spins is in no way altered when the matrix is rotated.  It matters not whether the disc rotates separate from the magnet or attached to it.  Now the answer to your original question, if the disc rotates the same way as the spins you get one polarity, and if it rotates the opposite way you get opposite polarity.


Smudge


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 215
Agreed, there needs to be motion of the brushes on the disc. The direction of the polarity was being questioned and we were left to investigate. The leading edge was our assumption, the trailing edge wasn't which should have in respect to the equilibrium.
It was long ago way before everyone had a colour TV lol.
Looking back at it and trying to recall, which isn't that easy now, there was something in it. The link shows it more clearly using current flow to indicate the polarity. The overall field being composed of many lines.
It'd been easy with the Internet, PSS was the only data available and we were not privy to that.
The good ol' days.

Yes, in respect to the field itself being 'fast' and not connected to the magnet. A solenoid wouldn't function if each strand in the loop had a fixed field. Each one creates the overall effect.
The spin direction creates the polarity and it was this that we assumed to be created by the electrons.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
Do you understand what Smudge said ?

Yes i do,and to quote further

The disc is a conductor and all parts of the disc except its centre are moving with a velocity proportional to the radius.  If you had a wheel with spokes then each spoke is a length of wire that is moving across the magnetic field.

This is what i am referring to as not being correct,as the disc dose not have move across the magnetic field in order for a current to flow.
There need only be motion between the disc and external circuit,but there dose not have to be motion between the disc and magnetic field for a current to flow.


Brad
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1754
Everyman decries immorality


Buy me a beer
http://webs.mn.catholic.edu.au/physics/emery/hsc_motors.htm

"The generation of electrical power requires relative motion between a magnetic field and a conductor.  In a generator, mechanical energy is converted into electrical energy while the opposite occurs in the electric motor."

The relative motion is between two different frames of reference, a static and a dynamic.

A mass with a natural magnetic field (magnet) is occupying a space, its field strength and force field projection (beyond the mass boundary) is proportional and dependent on this mass. This is the solid (in this example) matrix with billions of spins creating the field.

When you spin this field by mechanically spinning the magnet mass it creates "flux lines" as it moves through the stationary coil stator space.

You can of course do this the other way around..

The mass occupies a three dimensional space, when this mass "moves" it has a vector and is mapped in fourth dimensional space, 3D space (a volume) + time (rate of change) = 4D spacetime

From my point of view it is the rotational moment of a mass within 4D that allows for the extraction of electrical energy into a separate frame of reference external to the system.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
http://webs.mn.catholic.edu.au/physics/emery/hsc_motors.htm

  In a generator, mechanical energy is converted into electrical energy while the opposite occurs in the electric motor."[/i]

The relative motion is between two different frames of reference, a static and a dynamic.

A mass with a natural magnetic field (magnet) is occupying a space, its field strength and force field projection (beyond the mass boundary) is proportional and dependent on this mass. This is the solid (in this example) matrix with billions of spins creating the field.

When you spin this field by mechanically spinning the magnet mass it creates "flux lines" as it moves through the stationary coil stator space.

You can of course do this the other way around..

The mass occupies a three dimensional space, when this mass "moves" it has a vector and is mapped in fourth dimensional space, 3D space (a volume) + time (rate of change) = 4D spacetime

From my point of view it is the rotational moment of a mass within 4D that allows for the extraction of electrical energy into a separate frame of reference external to the system.

EA
This quote is very limited
"The generation of electrical power requires relative motion between a magnetic field and a conductor.

It dose not even touch on chemical reactions generating electrical power-although that has nothing to do with what we are discussing here.
My point is this,there dose not have to me relative motion between the magnetic field and conductor(the copper disc in this case) for the generation of electrical power. There need only be relative motion between the conductor and external circuit(this includes the contact brushes). As both the magnetic field and conductor(the disc) remain stationary,then there dose not have to be relative motion between the magnetic field and conductor in order to generate electrical power.

To be more accurate-
We can glue the magnet to the conducting disc,and both the magnet and disc may remain stationary-no motion.
We can then rotate the external circuit around that fixed magnet and conducting disc,where the brushes are in contact with that stationary disc,and electrical power will be produced within the external circuit.

If the current theory was correct,then it would be possible to design the homopolar generator so as it did not create a back torque on the prime mover driving it. The reason it is not possible,is because there has to be a velocity differential between the contact brushes in the external circuit. If there was no velocity differential between the contact brushes in the external circuit,then no power would be produced.

If there need not be a velocity differential between the two contact brushes,then a homopolar generator could be built that placed no back torque on the prime mover,and if this was possible,then it would be game,set, and match.

As i stated before,you need to see the external circuit of the homopolar generator as the stator of the generator.


Brad
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2898
tExB=qr
rotating the external circuit relative to the disk and magnet will not induce a current (except for the very tiny one due to the earth's magnetic field)

To induce a current in a conductor, you have to have relative motion between the force inducing the current and the conductor being induced.

In the case of the homopolar generator with the magnet attached to the disk, the magnetic field is homogeneous (uniform and unchanging), however, the disk is rotating, so there is relative motion between the force (magnetic field) and the conductor (disk).

The back-torque is inherent because it is caused by the forces that also induce the current.  Getting rid if the back-torque is probably not practical.

You will do better to find a way to rotate the forces that induce the current and leave the conductor still.

Attached is an explanation of the homopolor generator (and motor) based on the Gyroscopic Force Theory.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1494


Buy me some coffee
author=Grumpy link=topic=3333.msg57159#msg57159 date=1472654371]



Quote
rotating the external circuit relative to the disk and magnet will not induce a current (except for the very tiny one due to the earth's magnetic field)

To induce a current in a conductor, you have to have relative motion between the force inducing the current and the conductor being induced.

Grumpy
I am afraid that is not correct,and the reason that the homopolars workings are not yet fully understood by many.
This is why you must see the external circuit as the stator of the system,and there need only be motion between the conductor and stator of the system in order for the production of power,whether it is the conductor rotating,or the stator that is rotating around a fixed  conductor.

Quote
In the case of the homopolar generator with the magnet attached to the disk, the magnetic field is homogeneous (uniform and unchanging), however, the disk is rotating, so there is relative motion between the force (magnetic field) and the conductor (disk).

As stated above,there need be no motion between the conductor(disc) and force(magnetic field),but only motion between the disc and external circuit.

Quote
The back-torque is inherent because it is caused by the forces that also induce the current.  Getting rid if the back-torque is probably not practical.

The back torque(or back electro-mechanical force) is between the disc and contact brushes/external circuit.
If the generator was designed to eliminate this back torque,then no power would be produced.



Brad
   
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-06-27, 13:11:48