Is there a thread some where on OUR about the homopolar generator?,
On OU poynt started a thread-magnet myths and misconceptions-http://www.overunity.com/14974/magnet-myths-and-misconceptions/
I believe that these two put together would explain all we need to know about the other-they would go together like matches and dynomite,and result in an explosion of information.
I don't think there is Brad, but there is no mystery really about how or why the Faraday disc works.
Regarding the OU thread, some people still don't seem to understand; when I read things like "bringing a magnet near an iron bar, induces an opposite pole in the bar", I just shake my head. :(
Quote from: poynt99 on 2014.10.18, 13:15:26
I don't think there is Brad, but there is no mystery really about how or why the Faraday disc works.
Regarding the OU thread, some people still don't seem to understand; when I read things like "bringing a magnet near an iron bar, induces an opposite pole in the bar", I just shake my head. :(
My understanding is this. Magnets attract materials that have a large number of unpaired electrons that have the same directional spin.
In regards to the HPG or faraday disk,could you please post your understanding of the working principle behind it please poynt.
Cheers
Brad
Perhaps we could start with what your understanding of it is?
Quote from: poynt99 on 2014.10.18, 18:58:06
Perhaps we could start with what your understanding of it is?
I have no understanding as of yet,as i have never really looked into the HPG and it's working's. But in saying that,most of what others say on OU.com makes no sense to as how it work's ,as i see no reason for there to be any induction as they claim. For a voltage or current to be formed,there must be a change in magnetic field strength in relation to the conductor(disk). As the magnets can be/are attached to the disk,then there is no change in magnetic field strength in relation to the conductor-there for there is no induction. The explanation given by one was-a virtual wire is formed between the brushes,and this is the wire that cuts through the magnetic field. I don't see this being correct,as the brushes are fixed,and so,the virtual wire is also fixed in relation to the static magnetic field-so once again,no induction can occur.
I first believe at this moment,is that the magnetic field is creating some sort of situation that allows the electrons to move in a coarse spiral path through the disk-just a way out there wacky thought ATM.I picture these paths to represent the liquid flow path of that of a centrifugal water pump impeller. This would explain as to why the current flow reverses when the direction of rotation is reversed,and also by reversing the magnetic polarity would be like flipping the impeller over in relation to rotational direction-once again,changing the direction of flow.
This is why we need to understand as to what the magnetic field is-not just how and why it's created. What is that invisible force made of?.
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.18, 22:50:48
For a voltage or current to be formed,there must be a change in magnetic field strength in relation to the conductor(disk).
OK, let's start with this. Are you 100% sure?
If you conduct a little research, you will find that a charged particle, i.e. an electron moving perpendicular through a stationary uniform magnetic field will experience a force, the Lorentz force.
Quote
As the magnets can be/are attached to the disk,then there is no change in magnetic field strength in relation to the conductor-there for there is no induction.of?.
The magnetic field does not vary or change, regardless if it is attached to the disc or not. However the electrons see that uniform field (in either case) and when the disc is spun the Lorentz force causes them to move and this creates an emf across the radius of the disc.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2014.10.19, 01:57:08
OK, let's start with this. Are you 100% sure?
If you conduct a little research, you will find that a charged particle, i.e. an electron moving perpendicular through a stationary uniform magnetic field will experience a force, the Lorentz force.
The magnetic field does not vary or change, regardless if it is attached to the disc or not. However the electrons see that uniform field (in either case) and when the disc is spun the Lorentz force causes them to move and this creates an emf across the radius of the disc.
I don't see how that can work,as the magnetic field is uniform throughout the whole disk. This is like saying a voltage and current can be produced by running a magnet along the length of a wire.And if what you say is correct,then why would the polarity change by spinning the disk in the opposite direction,as the electrons are still moving within the same uniform magnetic field.
If you spin an aluminum disk and bring a magnet close to that spinning disk,it will experience the Lorentz force,but if the magnet is attached to the disk(spins with the disk),the disk will not experience the Lorentz force.Also most say there is no CEMF(backEMF) with the HPG,and some say that there is.
I have to ask poynt-do you know what you said to be true through experiments with the HPG,or are you going on what others say to be the workings of the HPG?.
Also,do you know what a magnetic field is?. I mean,we know how to create one,and why it comes to be-but do you know what it is,what physical form is creating the force?. The only thing i know that can exert a force that has no mass is the photon. Dose the magnetic field consist of photons?.
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.19, 07:55:49
I don't see how that can work,as the magnetic field is uniform throughout the whole disk.
There IS a uniform field there and this is precisely why it DOES work. I gather from your responses that you did not conduct any research like I suggested?
Quote
This is like saying a voltage and current can be produced by running a magnet along the length of a wire.
Who said that there isn't a voltage produced this way? Obviously it is not produced across the length of the wire, so then where CAN it be measured?
Quote
And if what you say is correct,then why would the polarity change by spinning the disk in the opposite direction,as the electrons are still moving within the same uniform magnetic field.
Conduct a little research. Basically the force direction experienced by the charges is dependent on the direction the charges move. You can even use the right hand rule to determine the direction of force; point your fingers in the direction the charges travel. Curl your fingers toward the direction of the B field (N-S). Now your thumb points in the direction of the force. Here are a few links to get you started:
education portal (http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/how-magnetic-forces-affect-moving-charges.html#lesson)
Hyperphysics
(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/movchg.html)uwinnipeg (http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/mod_tech/node93.html)
right hand rules (http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu/SeatExpts/resource/rhr/rhr.htm)
st mary's (http://www.stmary.ws/highschool/physics/home/notes/electricity/magnetism/magneticforcemovingcharges.htm)
If the theory of relative motion between a charged particle and a magnetic field was not predictable and controllable, CRT's for eg. would not have been invented.
Quote
If you spin an aluminum disk and bring a magnet close to that spinning disk,it will experience the Lorentz force,but if the magnet is attached to the disk(spins with the disk),the disk will not experience the Lorentz force.Also most say there is no CEMF(backEMF) with the HPG,and some say that there is.
I'm almost afraid to open this can of worms, but study eddy current brakes. Lenz's law takes effect when you have a stationary mag field that is not across the whole disc. This creates localized current loops in the disc that generate their own magnetic fields opposing the field of the fixed magnet, and hence the resulting drag. In this case there IS a build up or changing magnetic field experienced by the electrons in the disc, and localized current loops are induced in it as a result. In the case of the Faraday disc, the field is uniform across the entire disc and there is little to no fluctuation in the mag field seen by the electrons.
There are two modes of electromagnetic induction:
1) Motional. This pertains to the magnetic force on the charges in a moving wire (such as Faraday disc). Note that the magnetic field in this case does NOT have to be changing in strength for there to be an induced emf. There is relative movement, and that is all that is required.
2) Varying field. This pertains to cases where the magnetic field is changing in intensity which creates a changing electric field. This changing electric field induces an emf in a conductor that is coupled to it. Transformers are a good example.
Quiz: When you swipe a magnet across a wire, what mode of induction are you creating, 1) or 2)?
Quote from: poynt99 on 2014.10.19, 15:12:11
field is uniform across the entire disc and there is little to no fluctuation in the mag field seen by the electrons.
Quiz: When you swipe a magnet across a wire, what mode of induction are you creating, 1) or 2)?
That is mode two-(im not that far behind lol),as the conductor see's a changing(change in strength)magnetic field-normal induction.
In regards to the HPG,as the magnetic field is uniform,how and where is the CEMF produced-i have heard from a few that there isn't any if the machine is constructed right. This seems hard to believe,as if there is an EMF produced,then a CEMF should also be produced when a load is applied. I think that when a load is applied,then the HPG should also become a homopolar motor,but that motor wants to spin in the opposite direction-this would seem to be the CEMF to me?
Another look at the HPG:
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.20, 10:55:41
That is mode two-(im not that far behind lol),as the conductor see's a changing(change in strength)magnetic field-normal induction.
Well, actually it is modes 1) and 2). ;)
Quote from: poynt99 on 2014.10.20, 14:38:25
Well, actually it is modes 1) and 2). ;)
I was going to say
both, however you cannot determine
where within the wire the induction is occurring, using only standard instrumentation.
I was also going on the subject at hand-Quote: Motional. This pertains to the magnetic force on the charges in a moving wire (such as Faraday disc). Note that the magnetic field in this case does NOT have to be changing in strength.
If we swipe a magnet across a wire,then the magnetic field in relation to the wire is changing in strength. If we move the wire with the magnet,then we get nothing.
If you rotate the magnet with the disc, it still induces a current.
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.20, 21:24:14
I was also going on the subject at hand-Quote: Motional. This pertains to the magnetic force on the charges in a moving wire (such as Faraday disc). Note that the magnetic field in this case does NOT have to be changing in strength.
If we swipe a magnet across a wire,then the magnetic field in relation to the wire is changing in strength. If we move the wire with the magnet,then we get nothing.
The quiz question was an open-ended one, not necessarily related to HPG's.
The answer is both modes. When you swipe a magnet across a wire there is a change in the magnetic field, AND there is relative motion between the wire and magnet.
@Matt, I'm not sure I follow you?
So rather than a solid disk, what would be the result using a pancake coil of heavy gauge wire?
Assuming it was insulated wire, probably not much.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2014.10.20, 23:26:49
@Matt, I'm not sure I follow you?
Lets say you have a three foot piece of straight insulated wire, with ends A and B. You connect an oscilloscope ground reference to A and the test probe to B. If you swipe the magnet near the A end or the B end, you cannot tell the difference on the scope, but I'm quite certain the portion of the wire receiving the induction has changed.
If you add a center tap to the wire and try variations of probe arrangements, you can at least determine which end the induction is occurring. Only if you use uninsulated wire and try all possible probe positions can you then isolate the exact segment of wire where the induction is occurring, or is the strongest.
Even though some may say all stones have been turned over in regards to conductors and magnetic fields, I'm still not so certain we know everything there is to know. There is still a lot of geometries left to investigate.
There is not and cannot be OU in the homopolar generator. The physical act of drawing current current from it, creates the back-torque to limit it.
By the way, there is also a dielectric version, also not OU.
However, the toroidal device that "spherics" detailed is a homopolar generator with no moving parts.
Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.10.21, 01:08:58
Lets say you have a three foot piece of straight insulated wire, with ends A and B. You connect an oscilloscope ground reference to A and the test probe to B. If you swipe the magnet near the A end or the B end, you cannot tell the difference on the scope, but I'm quite certain the portion of the wire receiving the induction has changed.
Perhaps, but the over all measured effect would be the same, providing the measurement points are sufficient distance from the area where induction is taking place.
Quote
If you add a center tap to the wire and try variations of probe arrangements, you can at least determine which end the induction is occurring. Only if you use uninsulated wire and try all possible probe positions can you then isolate the exact segment of wire where the induction is occurring, or is the strongest.
Something tells me that may not be so. If the distance to the center tap is >> the width of the magnetic field/induction area (between ct and A say), measuring across ct to A should give you the same measured voltage as across B to A.
Or am I missing your point?
So can anyone tell me what a magnetic field consist of?
What matter creates the force?
Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.10.21, 01:54:58
There is not and cannot be OU in the homopolar generator. The physical act of drawing current current from it, creates the back-torque to limit it.
By the way, there is also a dielectric version, also not OU.
However, the toroidal device that "spherics" detailed is a homopolar generator with no moving parts.
Do you have any schematics for spherics design Grumpy
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.21, 04:30:03
So can anyone tell me what a magnetic field consist of?
What matter creates the force?
What does a gravitational field consist of Brad?
Or an electric field?
Does the field have to
consist of something in order to exist?
In all the above cases, there is a central source, and it is the effects we can measure when something is placed or moved near the source.
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.21, 04:30:03
So can anyone tell me what a magnetic field consist of?
What matter creates the force?
A magnetic field is a region of space having magnetic properties. :P
I pondered all of these questions years ago and every time I had an answer, another question popped up.
We can attribute the properties of a field to "space", with or without a carrier, but it makes more sense with a carrier.
Many brilliant minds have postulated that space is made up of tiny spinning vortices that are responsible for the properties of space. If so, and they are spinning, we should be able to couple to them.
Spherics' device is detailed here: http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=369.0
Quote from: TinMan on 2014.10.21, 04:30:03
So can anyone tell me what a magnetic field consist of?
What matter creates the force?
Since magnetic and electric effects are so closely related (a changing magnetic field "creates" an electric field and vice versa) I think your question ought to be "What matter creates them both?". And if we are to fill our "empty" space with some "matter" that does just that, shouldn't that same matter create gravitational force and even inertial force. My space is filled with particles that are something like neutrinos (may even be neutrinos) that have zero rest mass hence they whiz through space at light velocity. But they don't have zero momentum or zero energy. For people brought up to believe that momentum is mass*velocity it is difficult to imagine zero mass having momentum, but you have to realize that mass*velocity relates to the macro world, it does not relate to the quantum particle world. Science already accepts particles with zero rest mass having a property called momentum that has dimensions of mass*velocity and energy of dimensions mass*velocity^2. Then it is quite easy to get a force on a real mass (like an electron) by absorption and emission of those space-particles, which involves absorption and emission of momentum, and force is rate of change of momentum. Thus an electron continually absorbs space-particles arriving from all directions. Each impact creates a force impulse so here you have the mechanism for space to create forces. Of course all those impacts create a net force of zero if space-particles arrive equally from all directions, you just get an inward force on the surface. Because the electron is a stable particle it has to emit at the same rate (i.e. one in, one out but not necessarily instantaneously) so again there is an inward force impulse as each space-particle is released. It is then easy to establish that the electron can exhibit inertial mass if (a) there is a time delay between an arriving particle absorption on one side of the electron and the emission of a space-particle on the opposite side of the electron, and (b) the emitted particle goes out in the same direction that the arriving particle came in. Think of the electron being something like the Newton's Cradle desk toy (where an impact on one side of the line of spheres causes a sphere at the other end of the line to jump out) but able to do it in all directions. Even Newton's Cradle will have a time delay between impact on one side and emission in the other. So we can give the electron an inertial mass and even get a formula for it that includes the space-particle volume-density, the momentum of each space particle, the electron collision cross-section and the internal time delay.
Using this momentum exchange feature to explain electric and magnetic forces requires the use of a feature of the space-particles (and of the neutrino) that is spin. We don't know the thing is actually spinning, but spin allows the space-
particle to carry two vectors (a) its velocity and (b) its spin. Now we can have different situations like (i) the spin is aligned with the velocity either parallel or anti-parallel and (ii) the spin is not aligned and has some transverse component. Now you can see the beginnings of waves both longitudinal and transverse where space-particles can arrive at an electron with their density and spin transversivity modulated (by emission from some distant electrons). It is quite easy to derive Coulombs Law if we use the spin-vector as the direction of the electric field and deal only with longitudinal spins. Then the electron must have a characteristic whereby all space-particles emitted have their spins anti-parallel to their departing velocity, irrespective of the spin directions of the arriving particles. Now place that electron in an isotropic space where space-particles arrive on average in equal numbers from all directions and have equal numbers of parallel and anti-parallel spins, hence the space is electrically neutral. It is immediately seen that close to the electron, space is no longer electrically neutral, the particles being emitted have all their spins anti-parallel. This defines the electric field around the electron, and the density of those aligned-spin particles reduces according to the inverse square law. Note that this electric field is superimposed on the otherwise isotropic space so our test charge (perhaps another electron) doesn't just see that field as a series of force impulses, it also gets the jitter (Heisenberg uncertainty) from other space particles that don't come from the electron under consideration. It is fairly easy to arrive at the internal mechanism inside an electron that ensures that it responds to such an electric field. Put simply the direction that a space-particle is emitted depends upon the spin direction of the arriving one that triggers the emission, it emits it in the opposite direction to that spin-vector. Then you end up with the neutral background space still creating on average a zero force by supplying positive and negative kicks, but add on to that the electric field from a nearby charge and the electron will gain a net force according to our known laws because the kicks do not now cancel, there is an imbalance on average.
The magnetic effects occur when an electron is moving, and that brings in the relative velocity between that moving electron and the observer. The electron emits longitudinal space-particles with spin-vectors anti-parallel at light velocity in it own rest frame. Because of the electron movement and the composition of its velocity with the space particle velocity, when they arrive at the stationary observer the spin vectors are no longer anti-parallel, they have a degree of transversivity to the incoming velocity. It is that transverse component that accounts for magnetic effects, the kicks that it will produce on a stationary test charge are not in line with the arrival direction but offset slightly. The net result on the test charge is that it receives a torque, you can imagine the emitted space particles looking as though they have ricocheted off the surface all in the same sideways direction as determined by that transverse spin component. So what we see as magnetic forces has the same root cause as electric and inertia forces, it all comes down to space-particle interactions. And incidentally if our local space on the galaxy scale has space-particles that have on average a slight degree of transversivity (due to electron movement elsewhere in the universe) then the same rules that create the above three forces also create gravitation. That transversivity is removed by interaction with matter so around even an inert mass space is different, the particles radiating away from that mass are slightly different to the vast continuum of galaxy particles passing through. That could be called the difference between flat space and curved space.
Smudge
Hi All
I really did not know where to put this, but thought here was as good as anywhere :)
Our friend Robert Murry-Smith has been playing with diamagnetic ink "graphene ink" and has made a generator called SWAG. This works by moving an electrolyte, in this case salt water, across a sheat of graphene painted plastic and it generates a current.
He has now aligned the graphene with a magnetic field and increased the output significantly.
I can see more things that could be done with this, here is a link to his youtube site, he is very prolific in making videos :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1ITFwGp93w&list=UU4AkVj-qnJxNtKuz3rkq16A
regards
Mike 8)