Induction in the GFT (Gyroscopic force Theory) Involving Scalar Fields

[Grumpy]

In this thread:

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=979650b42e989c2bf3c4bdb97a56f681&topic=265.msg40229#msg40229

I posted some comments from username "GFT" regarding homopolar generators that are interesting.  Particular the part about a change in a ascalr field that yield a Lorentz force, which in-turn invokes and current and subsequent Lorentz force.

I copied this section of GFT's reply as follows:

"The conventional theory of electromagnetism perfectly explains the functioning of the Faraday disk, both qualitatively and quantitatively."

This statement is almost correct although you back into while all the time, making false claims to justify it. The behavior is based upon first generating a change in the electric field which generates a magnetic field which induces magnetic precession which is equivalent to the induction of an electric current. Conventional theory misses that initial change in the electrostatic field. . Remember the charge has to first be moving before one can apply F=qv*B. Conventional theory concentrates more upon the effects of changing the magnetic field or cutting the lines of magnetic flux. This approach isn't wrong but it is incomplete.
One must realize that according to my Law of Dimensions the Lorentz force may be expressed as
a. F=q*vxB
b. F=qv*B
c. F=qr*B/t
d. F=q*(Br)/t
e. F=ir*B
f. F=i*rB
g. F=qvB
All seven of these equations are algebraically equivalent and all seven, via the tenets of the law of Dimensions must find physical expression. (I'm pretty sure there are actually even more algebraic expressions of this law.) Suppose we start with equation g. Note the absence of the asterisk thus denoting the absence of a cross product thus a scalar or electrostatic product. This denotes we impart a velocity to charge even though the B field and the velocity vector are parallel. However in such a rotating disk every v vector represents a radius and therefore every v vector will have an orthogonal counterpart. Thus for every g equation there is and MUST BE a corresponding b equation. Note equation b is induced in the sense it exists primarily because the quantity qv, the change, (v), of the electrostatic field, (q), of equation g was generated first. One may be quick to assert that if F=qvB is electrostatic then it has to be the Coulomb force and equation g clearly does not present algebraically as the Coulomb force. But I prove quite conclusively that the Lorentz force and the Coulomb force are indeed equivalent. I can derive one from the other quite easily. It's listed in the book. Indeed there is and must be an equivalent expression of the Lorentz force or Coulomb's law along all three axes, x,y and z. Indeed that 3rd force is Newton's gravitational force law and once again I demonstrate in the book how Newton's gravitational force constant, G, can be expressed in terms of Coulomb's law.

So, we have a force produced by a scalar or electrostatic product F=qvB

which gives rise to F=qv*B 

Isn't this the conventional Lorentz force that is associated with current in a conductor?

1. Are these equations saying that a current is induced by an initial scalar field force?

2. You also stated that:

E/B=qv is the same as Ex-B=qv and you stated earlier that E=Bxqv [this is just the common Lorentz equation]

and

The Lorentz force says E=(qr/t)xB Therefore Ex(-B)=qr/t
and the induction equation is ExB=qr/t (same as) tExB=qr

What is the physical explanation of these two different induction equations?

3. what about the other induction equation ExB=ir  ?

[Grumpy]

(bump)

[GFT]

Lot's of good questions.  I promise I'll address them all.
Right now I'm in the throes of banging out a book,
(I hope short but who knows where it will go once the
equations start falling into place.  Let me get this out of the way
and I'll  then  answer all your questions.  Perhaps this new view on R will
shed more light on the subject.