For once I can see a meaningful discussion for once.

Lenz is involved.

Which is faster moving, an electric field or a magnetic field.

In a normal transformer the core is iron or "ferrite", the primary coil induces a changing magnetic field into the core which then induces into the secondary.

Dropping a magnet down a copper tube produces an equal opposing field (Lenz), is there a "delay" in the returning field? Maybe you do not see the delay because the tube is thousands of shorted loops joined together?

If those shorted loops were just two parallel independant loops which each has a charge, one positive and one negative, will that make a directional difference to a returning field (think perpendicular).

If those charges are oscillating at a frequency of MHz!!!!!!

I think I have given you enough to think about.

Quote from: unimmortal on 2026.08.10, 01:44:18
To clarify, I believe both fields North and South are operating at both ends of the magnet. I think N and S work together to grow and shrink, so it's not so much flipping, but handing off to the other polarity. It's this N and S working together that needs to be decoupled.

agreed.  they are both one and the same depending on point of reference.  look into the face of a N pole of a magnet, then look out from the face out is S.

I dont think there is any difference between the N and S as in strength or other characteristics. 


mags

Quote from: Magluvin on 2026.08.07, 16:31:20
 
if what you say were true, that the field flips from N on expansion and S on collapse, then the collapse would also induce a reverse current in reference to input currents, of which doesnt happen. like passing a wire with a N pole mag to the left and then passing a S mag to the right.  both will induce current in the wire in the same direction.

To clarify, I believe both fields North and South are operating at both ends of the magnet. I think N and S work together to grow and shrink, so it's not so much flipping, but handing off to the other polarity. It's this N and S working together that needs to be decoupled.

"I think the field rotates, and the reason you can't detect it is because this 'opposite field' is spinning the opposite direction and cancelling perceived motion from the outside, all as part of its function. This all gets exposed when moving from magnets to counterwound coils."

i think electrons have their own magnetic field that encircles the say, equator of the electron. not necessarily spinning, but say a disk of  field. that field is how i see a reason the electron interacts with other magnetic fields.  just my theory.

mags

" We've been tricked into thinking the North is both rise and fall back to zero for 1/2 a wavelength, when it is actually a South field that is shrinking back to zero because that is it's job."

i have to disagree here...   if we energize a coil and build a magnetic field, and then de energize, at first the expanding field cuts other windings on the way outward. that expansion and cutting create opposition to input until the current has reached max along with the mag field reaching max. then when you de energize, that collapsing field cuts the windings again but now, say left on expansion and right on collapse. inducing a current that is in the same direction as was the input current.
 
if what you say were true, that the field flips from N on expansion and S on collapse, then the collapse would also induce a reverse current in reference to input currents, of which doesnt happen. like passing a wire with a N pole mag to the left and then passing a S mag to the right.  both will induce current in the wire in the same direction.

people get the BEMF as to mean a reverse current on collapse. "capture back emf" .  temporary opposition to input. bemf only happens during input and build up of current and magnetic field. CEMF is that self induced current that opposes the input till max and max.  people at OU years ago had me believing that the collapse currents were reverse of the input currents. i have several switching power supply books. close examination of different simple buck or boost circuits and what happens each cycle will show that i am correct. put one on the bench. i am correct.  so now i have a very good understanding of the ins and outs of induction and mutual induction.

when you fully understand the collapsing field is the same polarity as the expanding field, unless maybe at zero crossing after collapse you will see a reversal, and know the direction of the cutting of the windings of a particular N or S polarity, it will stick with you.

mags

And digging we keep on doing. The previous designs all lead to unity but it opened new insights and better understanding. Here is the latest design in trying to exploit the electron spin.

Say you had a coil which you could stretch out to make longer. What would happen? Well to keep things simple lets consider a coil made out of two layers so we can translate one layer of it to essentially double its length. Additionally lets say you hold the current constant during translation.



When you do this you will experience a force against said translation which requires you to do mechanical work to essentially stretch out the coil. Magnetically this would roughly lead to halving of the flux in the coil since we didn't change the current or # of windings only its length. Also since we keep the current constant during translation this would lead to pumping electrical energy back into the source. However the full round trip energy bookkeeping will conclude that the electrical energy gained will be exactly compensated by the mechanical work required to lengthen the coil. So perfect unity.

However what if we added a ferromagnetic material to this system. Consider this core material to be made out of long individual strips rather than one solid core. Again we magnetize the coil which will now also magnetize the core. And again we pull out the coil and this time we also pull out half of the core strips with it. What will happen now? You might naively state that this is exactly the same situation as before since all we did was change the relative permeability of the system so everything just multiples by said factor and the energy book keeping will ultimately lead to the same balance.



However there is one major flaw with that reasoning. Yes the coil-on-coil interaction remains the same. But the cores don't mechanically act like coils. In fact they do opposite thing. Their forces actually point in the direction of motion and thus assist the translation!



So now we have this uncomfortable situation where during the separation the flux is dropping so we are pumping energy back to the source just like we did before with the coreless coil. However mechanically we have a different story as we are now gaining mechanical energy because the core pieces are essentially pushing each other out rather than wanting to remain stuck to their neighbors.

If you are not convinced by that here is a quick FEMM simulation showing an array of magnets that are all aligned in the same direction but half of them have been translated. As you can see their force is pointing in the positive x direction.



This of course does not represent the described system but at least hints at an interesting behavior. I also came to this conclusion from a completely different design but I wanted to lay the groundwork and use the simplest possible design to explain it.

Quote from: Magluvin on 2026.08.07, 05:22:00
when you say spin...   what is your description of that? 
i have my own ideas on that, but just want to know what your thinking is in your post as to what it does.

mags

I believe that 'lenz' has been mis-characterised as resistance. I think that resistance is an opposite field closing the gate everytime we try to open it. We've been tricked into thinking the North is both rise and fall back to zero for 1/2 a wavelength, when it is actually a South field that is shrinking back to zero because that is it's job.

I think the field rotates, and the reason you can't detect it is because this 'opposite field' is spinning the opposite direction and cancelling perceived motion from the outside, all as part of its function. This all gets exposed when moving from magnets to counterwound coils.

EM field in a coil must equalise, and that equalisation doesn't care if it has to be at 180° to do it. If you can get that to happen and can sustain it, the electrons in the wire are drawn in and pulled out, instead of the two resistant to change steps that we currently call lenz.

when you say spin...   what is your description of that? 
i have my own ideas on that, but just want to know what your thinking is in your post as to what it does.



mags

Quote from: Magluvin on 2026.08.07, 02:26:55
give it more lenz.....

by adding more drive coils?

mags

Not necessarily more, just redirecting the field of say a CCW coil into a CW coil. The caveat is the CW coil you want to fill up with CCW spin must be lower resistance if all the coils are equal, otherwise the equal resistance between counterwound coils yields very little. You can solve that problem with series and parallel connections to get a resistance bias between the two.

For example: 2 CCW coils connected in series, 2 CW coils connected in parallel - join the two together (inner winding to inner, outer winding to outer) and induce all coils equally. Wrap an output winding over all 4 coils. You are forcing the CW coil who already has a natural lenz in play that shrinks, to now have a 'lenz' that is growing as well. This shrinking/growing at the same time can be see on the beach - water from the wave flowing across the sand, while water is also flowing from the sand back to the ocean as the wave recedes - that ripple that sits on top of the two waves moving in two directions is our free energy. This is a simple example, but underpins any OU device.

The TPU still gets hot because there is no feedback, i.e. he is pulsing independant of the output, so despite being OU, he still had Lenz nipping at his heels.

give it more lenz.....

by adding more drive coils?

mags