Things just got interesting

[TinMan]

I watched all 3 vids and know the circuit.  I have to look to see which one it was, but it seems like one of the newer ones where Lewin talks a bit about concerns of the leads of the meter and such. But like you say, if it is the same current through the circuit, then there should be different voltages across the resistors. We cannot look at this circuit normally. Im guessing that the wire connections between the resistors and not the resistors(would think to use carbon) themselves, are the portions of the circuit that the induced current is happening.

One thing that has me thinking Lewins experiment didnt involve the meter/scope leads and were not the cause of his readings, is the fact that the meter or scope impedance would be the same for either side of the circuit!! If so then why the difference in the reading, AND those values measured and the difference is according to Ohms law and Faraday of the resistors in the circuit!!! Whats the impedance of a meter that reads very small currents, or even a scope lead vs a 1ohm or 9 ohm resistor in the circuit? How much effect could that have on the outcome, especially if the device reads what it is suppose to read according to  circuit realities?

So I want to have my hand at this. Im thinking to even have the resistors perpendicular to the driver coil axis and twisted pair leads from the scope connected across the resistors and lead straight out from the drive coil also to the scope. Lets say the resistor on the left is A on the top lead and C on the bottom, and the resistor on the right is B on the top lead and d on the bottom. If there actually is a different voltage across the left resistor A And C, and a different voltage across D and B,, then there must me a voltage difference between A and B and most likely the same voltage between C and D but inverted.

Being this is a magnetically induced voltage, this all could be the case vs having a third component like a battery in the circuit as Lewin expressed about this having to be an inductive input as shown to get the effect.

Lewin.     If anything, wrong or right, he is a rebel and wants to tell the truth. I respect that a lot.

Mags

Mags
If i could find the thread about this,where poynt and myself carried out these very tests,then i would post it here.

Lewin is good,but the error was the way he made the measurements.
When done correctly,all values sum to 0.

I will try and find that thread.
If not,i can do the tests again if you wish-->but no guarantees on the grammar 


Brad

[F6FLT]

@Ion

It also happened to me, I forgot about it, which is why I didn't tell you about it yesterday. So it seems that some DNS don't like overunityresearch.com.
See https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3754.0

[partzman]

I think this is part of the Kron thread which I believe was set up  by Chet.  I do not appear to be able to remove the post.  If you also want me banned then I'll just leave.

OK, I apologize as I was under the impression that you were the moderator of this thread.  Sorry about that.

Although I may not agree with you on occasion, I certainly do not wish you to be banned from this forum.

Regards,
Pm

[ion]

OK, I apologize as I was under the impression that you were the moderator of this thread.  Sorry about that.

Although I may not agree with you on occasion, I certainly do not wish you to be banned from this forum.

Regards,
Pm

I agree with partzman and don't want to see anyone banned from the forum unless they consistently violate the terms of the agreement and continue to do so after several clear warnings. Even then banning may be too extreme and perhaps read only status for a short time is all that is needed to bring violators back into compliance.

Regards

[TinMan]

I watched all 3 vids and know the circuit.  I have to look to see which one it was, but it seems like one of the newer ones where Lewin talks a bit about concerns of the leads of the meter and such. But like you say, if it is the same current through the circuit, then there should be different voltages across the resistors. We cannot look at this circuit normally. Im guessing that the wire connections between the resistors and not the resistors(would think to use carbon) themselves, are the portions of the circuit that the induced current is happening.

One thing that has me thinking Lewins experiment didnt involve the meter/scope leads and were not the cause of his readings, is the fact that the meter or scope impedance would be the same for either side of the circuit!! If so then why the difference in the reading, AND those values measured and the difference is according to Ohms law and Faraday of the resistors in the circuit!!! Whats the impedance of a meter that reads very small currents, or even a scope lead vs a 1ohm or 9 ohm resistor in the circuit? How much effect could that have on the outcome, especially if the device reads what it is suppose to read according to  circuit realities?

So I want to have my hand at this. Im thinking to even have the resistors perpendicular to the driver coil axis and twisted pair leads from the scope connected across the resistors and lead straight out from the drive coil also to the scope. Lets say the resistor on the left is A on the top lead and C on the bottom, and the resistor on the right is B on the top lead and d on the bottom. If there actually is a different voltage across the left resistor A And C, and a different voltage across D and B,, then there must me a voltage difference between A and B and most likely the same voltage between C and D but inverted.

Being this is a magnetically induced voltage, this all could be the case vs having a third component like a battery in the circuit as Lewin expressed about this having to be an inductive input as shown to get the effect.

Lewin.     If anything, wrong or right, he is a rebel and wants to tell the truth. I respect that a lot.

Mags

Mag's

I have found a video of the exact tests i carried out with poynt,from this funny electroBOOM guy.
The only thing he did not do was hold the scope measurement wire loop at right angles(vertical) to the magnetic field caused by the primary coil. Had he done that,the resultant voltage sum would be 0.

Kirchhoff's law hold's,and this is a great example how even the best of them can get it wrong.

So,as you can now see,we have a member here that has greater knowledge than that of prof Lewin,that being Poynt. There are also other members here that have far greater knowledge than those that are considered to be the best. So never be fooled by those you !think! may be untouchable,as the best of the best are often found right here on this forum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TTEFF0D8SA


Brad

[TinMan]

The looped conundrum 
A question for all 
Below is Lewins looped circuit.

Given conductors A and B have 0 resistance,how is it that R1 and R2 can have different voltages across them,as stated by ohms law?.
Or-how is it that they cannot have different voltages across them as ohms law states they should have?.


Brad

[Smudge]

My answer.
Smudge

[TinMan]

My answer.
Smudge

Both R1 and R2 are within a changing magnetic field.

Will await more answers.


Brad

[muDped]

Multimeters and Simple Voltmeters have limitations.

When in doubt an Oscilloscope is called for.

Scopes reveal much instant by instant.

[CITFTA]

Multimeters and Simple Voltmeters have limitations.

When in doubt an Oscilloscope is called for.

Scopes reveal much instant by instant.

I agree completely.  Except when the user doesn't know how to use a scope properly.

[partzman]

The looped conundrum 
A question for all 
Below is Lewins looped circuit.

Given conductors A and B have 0 resistance,how is it that R1 and R2 can have different voltages across them,as stated by ohms law?.
Or-how is it that they cannot have different voltages across them as ohms law states they should have?.


Brad

Brad,

IMO, this is an impossible circuit to build as shown and therefore violates no known laws.  I will stand corrected if it can be shown that this device can exist on the bench.

Regards,
Pm

[Smudge]

Both R1 and R2 are within a changing magnetic field.

Your picture didn't show that, it still had that field contained within a core.  Within a changing field the voltage induced into a closed circuit is given by the changing flux that passes through the loop, but that doesn't tell you how much voltage is induced into each part of the loop.You can have different areas of the loop having different flux changes, can even have one area with flux changing in the opposite direction.  So IMO you can have different voltages induced into R1 and R2 that when added to their voltage drops yield the same voltage across the parallel pair.
Smudge

[Aking.21]

I believe this is one of lewin's latest comments:
  All this is first year college level. My MIT lectures are available to anyone who wants to learn. Already in 2004, when my letures went online (MIT OCW) I decided not to get into useless debates with people who believe the Earth is Flat and not either with countless people who "believe" that 2 identical  voltmeters attached to the same 2 points in a circuit must show the same values. It's first year college physics that students learn that, bcoz of Faraday's Law, in the case of an induced emf, 2 volt meters can read VERY different values (even with reversed polarity) as I demonstrate in Lect #16 of 8.02. My circuit was identical to the one suggested by Romer in 1982. Romer (1982) What do Voltmeters measure?
http://www.phy.pmf.unizg.hr/~npoljak/files/clanci/guias.pdf.

[F6FLT]

...
in the case of an induced emf, 2 volt meters can read VERY different values (even with reversed polarity) as I demonstrate in Lect #16 of 8.02. My circuit was identical to the one suggested by Romer in 1982. Romer (1982) What do Voltmeters measure?
http://www.phy.pmf.unizg.hr/~npoljak/files/clanci/guias.pdf.

It's well known and it surprises only the newbies. A voltmeter measures the voltage+emf along a circuit, that is to say  U+∮(E + VxB).dl. Here we suppose that the circuit is static, therefore the voltmeter measures U+∮E.dl. ∮E.dl is the induced EMF due to a variable magnetic field.

The circuit consists of the voltmeter cords in series with the dipole whose voltage U is to be measured. If a net magnetic flux passes through the circuit area, it induces an emf that adds the voltage so you can't measure only U. As the crossing flux depends on the crossed circuit thus on the way the voltmeter cords are connected, different voltmeters readings are the logical consequence of the different crossed circuits.

No one is surprised that if the cords of several voltmeters go around the core of different powered transformers before they are connected to the device to be measured, not all will measure the same value.
The fact that the core is replaced by air does not change the principle when a variable magnetic field is present.

[TinMan]

Your picture didn't show that, it still had that field contained within a core.  Within a changing field the voltage induced into a closed circuit is given by the changing flux that passes through the loop, but that doesn't tell you how much voltage is induced into each part of the loop.You can have different areas of the loop having different flux changes, can even have one area with flux changing in the opposite direction.  So IMO you can have different voltages induced into R1 and R2 that when added to their voltage drops yield the same voltage across the parallel pair.
Smudge

You lost me Smudge.
The circle in the center represents the primary coil,and the outer loop with R1 and R2 represent the secondary looped coil. This is Lewins test setup.

The primary induces a current flow in the secondary loop.
Conductors A and B have 0 resistance.
This means that the voltage across R1 and R2 must be the same.
But ohms law states that if the current flowing through each resistor is the same,then the voltage will be different-which it cant be. But ohms law also states that if the voltage is the same across each resistor,then the current must be different-->can the current flowing through a closed loop be different on each half?. 


Brad

[TinMan]

Brad,

IMO, this is an impossible circuit to build as shown and therefore violates no known laws.  I will stand corrected if it can be shown that this device can exist on the bench.

Regards,
Pm

Im not sure how you see it as an impossible circuit ?.

Looking at my pic below,we have a primary coil in the center of the loop(secondary coil).
This primary coil is fed with either AC or a pulsed DC,which induces a current flow in the looped secondary.

Brad

[partzman]

Im not sure how you see it as an impossible circuit ?.

Looking at my pic below,we have a primary coil in the center of the loop(secondary coil).
This primary coil is fed with either AC or a pulsed DC,which induces a current flow in the looped secondary.

Brad

I must be missing the point of this exercise!  The circuit is impossible because there must be a voltage compliance in the wires connected to the resistors or there are induced voltages in the probe leads both of which must be assumed.  In reality, there are induced voltages in the probe or measurement leads depending on position as Mr Boom points out so if this is unknown, the circuit can not be understood.

Regards,
Pm 

[TinMan]

I must be missing the point of this exercise!  The circuit is impossible because there must be a voltage compliance in the wires connected to the resistors or there are induced voltages in the probe leads both of which must be assumed.  In reality, there are induced voltages in the probe or measurement leads depending on position as Mr Boom points out so if this is unknown, the circuit can not be understood.

Regards,
Pm

Ok,here is what this test is about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5be3zpj_eCY&t=1411s

Here prof Lewin claims Kirchhoff's law dose not hold.
I ran these very tests with Poynt,and found the error in Lewins measurement method,and that Kirchhoff's law hold's.

But i further ask the questions regarding this test,and they are
1-will the voltage be the same across both resistors,or-
2-is the value of current flowing through the loop the same or different on each side of the resistors.
IOW,is the current flowing through conductor A the same value of current flowing through conductor B ?.

Ohms law states that if the current is the same flowing through both resistor's,that the voltage across the two resistors must be different.
Ohms law also states that if the voltage across both resistors is the same,then the current flowing through the resistors must be different.

It would seem both Lewin and ElectroBOOM missed this point.


Brad

[Magluvin]

Ok,here is what this test is about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5be3zpj_eCY&t=1411s

Here prof Lewin claims Kirchhoff's law dose not hold.
I ran these very tests with Poynt,and found the error in Lewins measurement method,and that Kirchhoff's law hold's.

But i further ask the questions regarding this test,and they are
1-will the voltage be the same across both resistors,or-
2-is the value of current flowing through the loop the same or different on each side of the resistors.
IOW,is the current flowing through conductor A the same value of current flowing through conductor B ?.

Ohms law states that if the current is the same flowing through both resistor's,that the voltage across the two resistors must be different.
Ohms law also states that if the voltage across both resistors is the same,then the current flowing through the resistors must be different.

It would seem both Lewin and ElectroBOOM missed this point.


Brad

If the wires between the resistors are the 'source' to the circuit by being induced by flux from the driver coil, then there will also be a voltage measured across each wire due to the pressures of charge induced in the wires met with the impedance of the resistors, whether the conductors are normal or superconducting. A shift of electrons from one end of the wire to the other, between the resistors, will show voltage across that wire. Just because the wires are a current source, does not mean that they cannot have voltage read across them when in the circuit.

And, if it measures 0v between the center of the length of one wire to the center of the length of the other wire, then we have another things going on in the wires, if the resistors have different voltages at that point in time.  One half length of the wire should have more voltage across it than the other, in order for there to be 0v measured between the 2 centers of the wires. With the smaller value resistor, the 2 halves of the induced wires connected to it will have higher voltage values than the 2 halves connected to the higher value resistor, all in order to measure 0v any where around the circuit as per Kirchhoff's experiment.

Mags