PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-05-18, 20:19:20
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9
Author Topic: Where i'm at 1+1=3  (Read 14543 times)
Group: Private Brad's PMM v2.0
Newbie
*

Posts: 5
How to make an adjustable gate field, and contain the opposite field.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sXmD5dm8S8


Brad

Thank you Brad!  Your selflessness in sharing this is a heroic gesture worthy of the greatest admiration.  I teared up watching your video.  I don't know of anyone who has discovered a key to an OU device that has ever freely shared it with the world like you just did.  They keep it to themselves in hopes of personal profit and either take it to their grave or are suppressed before they die.  I hope you are remembered throughout history for your compassion and kindness to all the beings on this planet.  Well done.
   
Group: Private Brad's PMM v2.0
Newbie
*

Posts: 5
Hi Brad,

I'm super grateful for your recent video showing your gate concept as posted above.  While I have no doubt your gate works, do you think it might possibly work by a different mechanism than what you explained? 

I replicated your demonstration and found that the protruding piece of steel did not show repulsion towards a like pole magnet though it did attract, like any piece of steel would.  This puzzled me so I ran the attached FEMM study which also does not show any magnetic field extending out into the protruding piece of steel.

What am I missing?

Thx,
Dave
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
Hi Brad,

I'm super grateful for your recent video showing your gate concept as posted above.  While I have no doubt your gate works, do you think it might possibly work by a different mechanism than what you explained? 

I replicated your demonstration and found that the protruding piece of steel did not show repulsion towards a like pole magnet though it did attract, like any piece of steel would.  This puzzled me so I ran the attached FEMM study which also does not show any magnetic field extending out into the protruding piece of steel.

What am I missing?

Thx,
Dave

It is not to repel the magnets, it is to reduce the attraction toward the steel, and to keep the two approaching magnets fields from one another.
Keep in mind that only a % of the two rotor magnets fields has to be reduced, in order to gain an offset, and thus rotation.
The greater this reduction % is, the more torque the motor has.

1+1=3
The field intensity on the gate plate can be increased by up to 5 times, by using bucking fields on the plate, as we found out in the 1+1=3 motor build.
So, one fixed magnet, and one adjustable one, to increase or decrease field intensity on the plate.

As seen on the other side of the stator former, there is an adjusting screw hole to adjust the bucking magnets.
The two holes on the other end of the tube is just for a magnet/spring retaining pin.

Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
If you have not yet watched this film by Steven Greer, kick back, and enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FKtI1cal4U


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Group: Private Brad's PMM v2.0
Newbie
*

Posts: 5
It is not to repel the magnets, it is to reduce the attraction toward the steel, and to keep the two approaching magnets fields from one another.
Keep in mind that only a % of the two rotor magnets fields has to be reduced, in order to gain an offset, and thus rotation.
The greater this reduction % is, the more torque the motor has.

1+1=3
The field intensity on the gate plate can be increased by up to 5 times, by using bucking fields on the plate, as we found out in the 1+1=3 motor build.
So, one fixed magnet, and one adjustable one, to increase or decrease field intensity on the plate.

As seen on the other side of the stator former, there is an adjusting screw hole to adjust the bucking magnets.
The two holes on the other end of the tube is just for a magnet/spring retaining pin.

Brad

Thanks for the clarification.  Bucking magnets make sense.  I totally understand that.  The field between them will shoot out down the steel strip and FEMM confirms.  That seems the way to go. 

Thanks for the plug for Dr. Greer's film. 

   
Newbie
*

Posts: 16
Hello
a question. Are the magnets in the gate bigger? In my test, the field is not enough.
Greeting
Lota
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 22
I'm not sure if this is of use to anyone. At work when I've done models for FEA I often try to create scripts to generate them on the fly so I can play with multiple variables and it makes it easier to sweep through them and optimize designs. I've attached a python script to create a model with given parameters. It can be extended and toyed with more which I will do later. I might tidy things up too to make certain parts of it less hacky but for now it does what I want it to.

You'll need FEMM installed as well as Python 3 and pyfemm lib installed (pip install pyfemm in cmd line).
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2661
Beginners mind
Quote
I replicated your demonstration and found that the protruding piece of steel did not show repulsion towards a like pole magnet though it did attract, like any piece of steel would.  This puzzled me so I ran the attached FEMM study which also does not show any magnetic field extending out into the protruding piece of steel.

What am I missing?

Indeed, what are you missing?. I had everything on hand to replicate the effect Tinman showed in his video and the steel lamination is magnetized in both a repulsion and attraction mode more or less. That is N N N II S and N N N II N. As Tinman implied the lamination polarity is similar to the weaker magnetic pole because it is shifted off center from the neutral zone. Magnetic viewing film shows some of the pole field structure but not very well. I will have to dust off my hall sensor array and map this gate configuration.

In my Wesley Gary magnetic motor experiments I found FEMM seldom if ever works. The problem is that the code like science does not recognize a neutral zone. That is the point where two fields separated by a boundary condition merge. It does not matter if the fields are in attraction or repulsion there is always a neutral zone. Logically one field polarity cannot transition into another field polarity without losing its polarity in the process. In effect no neutral point is similar to the notion of something from nothing. A transition without a real transition, it's absurd.

Think about it, we have no issue with a negative charge transitioning into a positive charge when at the "zero crossing" of a Sine wave. We recognize that one quality has transitioned into a different one at some "point". Do you know why almost every other area of science recognizes a neutral or transition zone/point but not the Primary Fields?. It's because most falsely believe Faraday's imaginary field lines are real, lol. So it's just a silly misunderstanding in some sense. Many people have come to believe in imaginary man made things which are not real which then corrupted there understanding of nature and reality.

As well it's super easy to prove by experiment. Measure the field between any two field sources with a real field measurement device. In every case there is always a field transition point between the two fields where the field polarity ceases to exist, a neutral or zero point. What other proof do we need?.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 22
Beginners mind
Indeed, what are you missing?. I had everything on hand to replicate the effect Tinman showed in his video and the steel lamination is magnetized in both a repulsion and attraction mode more or less. That is N N N II S and N N N II N. As Tinman implied the lamination polarity is similar to the weaker magnetic pole because it is shifted off center from the neutral zone. Magnetic viewing film shows some of the pole field structure but not very well. I will have to dust off my hall sensor array and map this gate configuration.

In my Wesley Gary magnetic motor experiments I found FEMM seldom if ever works. The problem is that the code like science does not recognize a neutral zone. That is the point where two fields separated by a boundary condition merge. It does not matter if the fields are in attraction or repulsion there is always a neutral zone. Logically one field polarity cannot transition into another field polarity without losing its polarity in the process. In effect no neutral point is similar to the notion of something from nothing. A transition without a real transition, it's absurd.

Think about it, we have no issue with a negative charge transitioning into a positive charge when at the "zero crossing" of a Sine wave. We recognize that one quality has transitioned into a different one at some "point". Do you know why almost every other area of science recognizes a neutral or transition zone/point but not the Primary Fields?. It's because most falsely believe Faraday's imaginary field lines are real, lol. So it's just a silly misunderstanding in some sense. Many people have come to believe in imaginary man made things which are not real which then corrupted there understanding of nature and reality.

As well it's super easy to prove by experiment. Measure the field between any two field sources with a real field measurement device. In every case there is always a field transition point between the two fields where the field polarity ceases to exist, a neutral or zero point. What other proof do we need?.

AC

It may be possible to do some post processing of the ans files that femm gives to render such neutral zones more easily and then trick femm into rendering it. I'll have a dig around in the FEMM source and see if there is some documenation of the format for the ans files. When I was working on this sorta stuff full time I ran into issues like this and unfortunately the format of the files was proprietary and obfuscated. FEMM being open source should be able to be easier to work with in this way. Once I understand what quantities are what in the files then finding some mathematical definition of the neutral fields based on the quantities I have at hand would be the next step perhaps some kind of differentiation over space or a 1/x kind of situation. Likely will take some tinkering but I believe it's possible.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 253
In my Wesley Gary magnetic motor experiments I found FEMM seldom if ever works.

 FEMM very much models reality if you know how to use it, if there's no effect in FEMM there's no effect in reality. Don't blame the tool blame the tool head using it.
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 22
FEMM very much models reality if you know how to use it, if there's no effect in FEMM there's no effect in reality. Don't blame the tool blame the tool head using it.

I agree to a point however FEMM has its limitations (eddy currents are one I can think of). If you know how to use it you can get great results however how we interpret results in many cases can come in how we're visualizing the fields. Use some of that magnetic viewing film and look at a FEMM result and you'll see the discrepancy. I believe AC is simply saying in problems where you care about manipulating the "neutral" of a magnetic field you'll have a hard time visualizing what is going on with the fields.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 253
I agree to a point however FEMM has its limitations (eddy currents are one I can think of). If you know how to use it you can get great results however how we interpret results in many cases can come in how we're visualizing the fields. Use some of that magnetic viewing film and look at a FEMM result and you'll see the discrepancy. I believe AC is simply saying in problems where you care about manipulating the "neutral" of a magnetic field you'll have a hard time visualizing what is going on with the fields.

True every tool has its limit, therefore you must know what you are doing and what the results are telling you. Magnetic viewing film shows the "current" lines of a magnet, not its "field" or "poles". Tool heads like AC can perhaps learn something from the many smart people out there in places he calls "cesspools" then one idea he can finally manage to replicate someone else's ideas that actually works. Then again every tool has its limits.
« Last Edit: 2024-04-08, 08:21:42 by broli »
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
Quote
author=broli link=topic=4603.msg111410#msg111410 date=1712557117



Quote
Magnetic viewing film shows the "current" lines of a magnet

What current ?
The magnetic field is a separation of charge as far as I'm concerned.
Now, what the charge is, is yet to be discovered.
But there is something all around us which the magnet is separating into +/- charges, including the magnet it self.
What ever it is, the charge density close around the PM, is extremely dense, hence why like polls repel (like charges), and opposite polls attract (opposite charges)
It could well be this dark energy or matter they keep on talking about.

But think about it.
We know how to create this field of separated charges (the magnetic field), but are yet to work out what this field is, or how we can pull energy from this field.
Now, if we ever work out how to draw from this field of charge, we would have a limitless supply of energy, and the PM would just keep on separating these charges as we draw from it.

Science doesn't yet know what the field is, because science has a one track mind.
Science thinks that charges are only what we know today. It either has to be an electrical positive charge, or an electrical negative charge, when it comes to electrical energy.
So the end result is, they won't find what they are not looking for--a different type of energy.

Quote
Tool heads like AC can perhaps learn something from the many smart people out there in places he calls "cesspools"

Please keep your posts respectful.
I can tell you now, AC knows his way around thing like this, and many other subjects.
I think you could learn a thing or two from him.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 253


What current ?
The magnetic field is a separation of charge as far as I'm concerned.
Now, what the charge is, is yet to be discovered.
But there is something all around us which the magnet is separating into +/- charges, including the magnet it self.
What ever it is, the charge density close around the PM, is extremely dense, hence why like polls repel (like charges), and opposite polls attract (opposite charges)
It could well be this dark energy or matter they keep on talking about.

But think about it.
We know how to create this field of separated charges (the magnetic field), but are yet to work out what this field is, or how we can pull energy from this field.
Now, if we ever work out how to draw from this field of charge, we would have a limitless supply of energy, and the PM would just keep on separating these charges as we draw from it.

Science doesn't yet know what the field is, because science has a one track mind.
Science thinks that charges are only what we know today. It either has to be an electrical positive charge, or an electrical negative charge, when it comes to electrical energy.
So the end result is, they won't find what they are not looking for--a different type of energy.

Please keep your posts respectful.
I can tell you now, AC knows his way around thing like this, and many other subjects.
I think you could learn a thing or two from him.


Brad

We can all learn from each other, but its hard to respect someone who brings bigotry and racism to the open table of sharing ideas. If he apologies I will do the same and retract my comment. So far he hasn't, calling places where billions of innocent people live in peace "cesspools", so a tool head he remains. If you want to target someone, target failed corrupt leaders not the places where people live as your own leaders have brought your own house, in what I assume to be Canada, on the brink of collapse. Bickering amongst ourselves is exactly what these "leaders" love. There is already enough conflict and wars in the world, no need to start any here.

Anyway back to sharing ideas. There are no "charges", and this is a misconception brought by bad teaching. Calling a magnet a "dipole" only serves to confuse further. However if we look at a magnet for what it actually contains, namely a bunch of aligned electrons, it starts to make much more sense. The "current" represents the outer edges of the spins of the electrons that do not cancel each other due to their neighbors. When all electrons are aligned, their "inner" spin/currents components cancel and so you are only left with the outer edge part as there are no more neighbors to cancel it. This is also why you can model a PM as a coil, they are completely equivalent to each other given the right current.  See attached drawing.

Unlike coils though, PMs are special, they are constant current coils. No matter how you manipulate some other "field" around them their "current" remains constant unlike a regular coil.

But as your idea implies, not everything is a PM, iron also contains these electrons but they are "soft" and can be easily manipulated and reoriented by an external magnetic force giving rise to complex non-linear dynamics. If exploited can give rise to interesting things. The best part is that this can be fully explored in FEMM as well perhaps making "science" look even worse for overlooking such a feature that was present in our current models of EM. At least they can say "it was there all along" and they can continue sleeping on that comfortable pillow of their education.
« Last Edit: 2024-04-08, 11:35:15 by broli »
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
We can all learn from each other, but its hard to respect someone who brings bigotry and racism to the open table of sharing ideas. If he apologies I will do the same and retract my comment. So far he hasn't, calling places where billions of innocent people live in peace "cesspools", so a tool head he remains. If you want to target someone, target failed corrupt leaders not the places where people live as your own leaders have brought your own house, in what I assume to be Canada, on the brink of collapse. Bickering amongst ourselves is exactly what these "leaders" love. There is already enough conflict and wars in the world, no need to start any here.

Anyway back to sharing ideas. There are no "charges", and this is a misconception brought by bad teaching. Calling a magnet a "dipole" only serves to confuse further. However if we look at a magnet for what it actually contains, namely a bunch of aligned electrons, it starts to make much more sense. The "current" represents the outer edges of the spins of the electrons that do not cancel each other due to their neighbors. When all electrons are aligned, their "inner" spin/currents components cancel and so you are only left with the outer edge part as there are no more neighbors to cancel it. This is also why you can model a PM as a coil, they are completely equivalent to each other given the right current.  See attached drawing.

Unlike coils though, PMs are special, they are constant current coils. No matter how you manipulate some other "field" around them their "current" remains constant unlike a regular coil.

But as your idea implies, not everything is a PM, iron also contains these electrons but they are "soft" and can be easily manipulated and reoriented by an external magnetic force giving rise to complex non-linear dynamics. If exploited can give rise to interesting things. The best part is that this can be fully explored in FEMM as well perhaps making "science" look even worse for overlooking such a feature that was present in our current models of EM. At least they can say "it was there all along" and they can continue sleeping on that comfortable pillow of their education.

If what you say is true, then this !current! should be of equal value throughout the magnet and the field, which it is not.
The PM cannot be modeled as a coil, as the likes of a neodymium PM is a dead short- a coil is not. A coil has resistance, a PM does not.
A coil has a rise and fall time, a PM does not. In fact, there is not one thing the same, other than a coil produces a magnetic field, but the magnetic field of an electromagnet is not the same as that of a PM field.

The nice little pictures of PMs, that show arrows coming out of the north end, circling back around to the south end, and then flowing through the PM body, is nothing short of garbage.
We can clearly measure from one pole to center, a decline of charge down to 0, and then an incline of opposite charge from 0 up to maximum charge to the opposite outer pole of the PM body.
If there was some form of current flowing through the PM body, as the pretty pictures show, then we should see no change along the length of the PM body at all, as these currents must be of the same value throughout. But we don't. We see a sine wave from one end of the PM body, to the other end, not a continuous current flow.

The magnetic field is in the shape of infinity-a figure 8 on it's side, along the length of a long rod magnet
But so often, people are fooled by the wonderful sprinkling of iron filings over a piece of paper that is on top of a PM, thinking they are seeing this wonderful picture of field lines, oblivious to the fact that each one of them iron filings has become a temporary PM it self. And all these little PMs are sticking to each other, and not following the actual path of the PMs field.

See example below of garbage Vs reality.
If it were as the picture on the left side shows, where the arrow points from N to S, then if you had a long magnet as such, and a coil facing out through the page, then you should be able to pass that PM across the face of the coil, and get the same positive or negative sine as the PM approaches the coil, along the whole length of that magnet, as the lovely arrow shows that the same flowing field will be cutting through the coil along it's whole length. But we don't get that. We get what would be the case of the picture on the right, where one end of the PM will show say a negative sign as that end of the PM approaches the coil, and we get the opposite sine as  the other end of the magnet approaches the coil. And if we pass the middle of the PM across the coil, we get nothing, as the field value is 0.

There is no currents, there is a separation of some form of charge happening in the PMs field, and I intend on finding out what this charge separation is. Could be this dark energy they need, in order for relativity to work on a universal scale, or it could be the either having what ever kind of charges it has, being separated.

A PM is billions of atomic generators acting together, and creating a charge separation around the PM body.
Thats my claim.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 253
Charge is the linear domain, and magnetism is the non-linear domain. You cannot mix them up. I agree on the field line visualization being confusing to people who have no background knowledge on electromagnetism but what I am saying is nothing new. Electrons spin, forever, at a fixed magnetic moment no matter what you do to them, this is the "magic" of nature still not understood by modern science. As you say, in our "domain" we only know of currents and resistance (positive friction). But the spin of electrons live in the "negative friction" domain. The interesting part is that these two domains can interact. Because this spin can ALSO impart MECHANICAL angular momentum on the lattice of the material in our "mechanical/material" world: see the Einstein-de Haas effect or the Feynman disk paradox. The electron spin is therefore a real thing that can manifest itself as mechanical energy. And the same btw goes for current flow, when electrons flow they impart momentum on the lattice, which continuously deforms it, and causes it to heat up which we see as "resistance." But we can also deform it using angular momentum and perhaps cause the inverse to happen. However we dont need to deform it on the molecular level, the cool part of magnetism is that a PM is LITERALLY a giant electron in the very palm of your hand. So we can expand these molecular effects to the macroscopic scale as well.

Confusing linear forces (charge/movement) with non-linear forces (magnetism/spin) wil not make you a good parent as you will misunderstand your own child forming wrong conclusion. I did the same and had to relearn all this bad garbage and align myself ironically back into non-linear thinking. However when we combine linear and non linear forces, at the right angle, there seems to be magic. If you cant explain that magic correctly then sure your idea works, but it will only confuse people and even put people off as the "theory" behind WHY the thing works is fundamentally wrong.
   

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 59


Buy me some coffee
Below is a quick video I've recently took to support the magnet motor I'm working on.

For anyone who wants to actually see the direction of flow within a magnet - gently rock a magnet bar underneath ferrofluid. It will be 'sticky' so take the time to do this smoothly. Below is what you should see.

https://youtube.com/shorts/J975N1mUxgE?si=ANNXs3ZDtB-BykEL

So much for uniform...
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 253
Perhaps to drive the point even further home. Attached you see a simulation of a coil next to a N52 10mmx10mm magnet. I needed to crank current up to 23000Amps for the coil, which goes to show how powerful magnets are that you hold in your hand without much thought. Can you tell the difference in their "field"? Because I cant, as they look like identical twins to me.

Its funny how you sometimes think something is common knowledge until you discover it is not. However changing your viewpoint on something is perhaps mankinds most difficult feat, mine included.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
Below is a quick video I've recently took to support the magnet motor I'm working on.

For anyone who wants to actually see the direction of flow within a magnet - gently rock a magnet bar underneath ferrofluid. It will be 'sticky' so take the time to do this smoothly. Below is what you should see.

https://youtube.com/shorts/J975N1mUxgE?si=ANNXs3ZDtB-BykEL

So much for uniform...

Yep
As I said, clearly a figure 8, where there is 0 value to the field at the center of the bar magnet.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1688
One of the problems with forums is that info and data gets buried over time and thus has to be repeated to those who might have missed something.

I have posted this video before but I think it bears repeating at this point.  It appears to agree with Brad and the solution to these questions must be answered with experiments!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2JFDpTE_ls

Regards,
Pm
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
Quote
author=broli link=topic=4603.msg111421#msg111421 date=1712580317


Quote
Can you tell the difference in their "field"? Because I cant, as they look like identical twins to me.

Yep, but you cant see it.
The electromagnet has an electric field mixed in with the magnetic field.
A PM does not have !what we call! an electric field around it.

This makes the fields of the two different--they are not the same.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
One of the problems with forums is that info and data gets buried over time and thus has to be repeated to those who might have missed something.

I have posted this video before but I think it bears repeating at this point.  It appears to agree with Brad and the solution to these questions must be answered with experiments!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2JFDpTE_ls

Regards,
Pm

Great simple experiment Partzman.
Not sure how i missed that, but i have been away for some time.

Yes, there are those stuck with the mainstream science, and there are those of us that seek the truth and facts.

What your video showed, is exactly what we should see.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 59


Buy me some coffee
Yep
As I said, clearly a figure 8, where there is 0 value to the field at the center of the bar magnet.

Brad

Ok, so how come the first half of the clip is two sides that are fairly uniform, but the second half shows a stifled flow between the poles, with the last side showing a CCW vortex forming on the south pole?

You're close thinking a figure 8, but a torus would be more accurate.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 253
Hahaha the party of linear thinkers is growing. Where is F6 when you need him, please rescue me from this dipole charge madness and align these thinkers into circular thinking ;D.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4646


Buy me some coffee
, ,



Quote
Ok, so how come the first half of the clip is two sides that are fairly uniform

That is the figure 8 field, where the center has no field.

Quote
but the second half shows a stifled flow between the poles

Because you are rocking the magnet from end to end.

Quote
with the last side showing a CCW vortex forming on the south pole?

Nothing more than fluid dynamics.
The fluid rushing in from the other end causes the rotation.
This rotation can be made to go in both directions at once, or either direction, depending on what angle you have your magnet.

Quote
You're close thinking a figure 8, but a torus would be more accurate.

A 3 dimensional figure 8 is a double torus-an hour glass.
The symmetry of this hour glass figure would depend on the shape of the PM

Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-18, 20:19:20