PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-06-21, 03:04:58
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Beyond mainstrean science without falling into the nonsense  (Read 2220 times)
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2023
I draw your attention to this remarkable site of Peng Kuan, with well illustrated and explained experiments, often challenging the classical theories. Most of his experiments date back to the 2010s but we can still see his activity on Youtube in 2021.

Even if I think that the phenomena of some of his experiments may be artifacts or analysis errors, they are well described and Peng Kuan knows what he is talking about, he is a Dr in physics sciences. See for example his paper "Relativistic length contraction and magnetic force". If the math can seem complicated, go to the conclusion, where he explains why Lenz's law will always apply, because it is simply the coulombic influence between charges.

But the one who explains that Lenz's law is inescapable, also proposes experiments that seem to defy what is commonly accepted, see for example his experiment on the longitudinal magnetic force. Peng Kuan relies on mainstream science to go beyond, his method is much more intelligent than the denial of science and the denigration of scientists that we regularly see in the free energy movement. And since he is competent, his experiments may be really challenging and he also knows how to draw conclusions from his negative experiments.  I think there is something to learn from him.



« Last Edit: 2023-02-09, 19:27:20 by F6FLT »


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 562
I do like that he performs experiments and doesn't just live in the 'math world'. :)  Makes it much more useful IMO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P33Hgj68G9M


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2023
But his experiment lacks care. It is clear that since the coil is rectangular, when he rotates it in a plane perpendicular to the plane of the cylindrical magnet, there will be some variation in flux through the coil.
A perfectly circular coil with small windings cross-section would be required.
Then he did not visualize the current. With a remotely weakly coupled coil-probe, he could have seen the signal on an oscilloscope. If what he says is true (tangential EMF), the current should be continuous. But I bet it's alternating.
So most of his experiments have to be redone, he made absolutely no attempt to fault them, I think I got excited a little fast.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1694
But his experiment lacks care. It is clear that since the coil is rectangular, when he rotates it in a plane perpendicular to the plane of the cylindrical magnet, there will be some variation in flux through the coil.
A perfectly circular coil with small windings cross-section would be required.
Then he did not visualize the current. With a remotely weakly coupled coil-probe, he could have seen the signal on an oscilloscope. If what he says is true (tangential EMF), the current should be continuous. But I bet it's alternating.
So most of his experiments have to be redone, he made absolutely no attempt to fault them, I think I got excited a little fast.

I totally agree!  Attached is a pix of a circular coil on a 3D printed bobbin that I used to test Peng's tangential induction theory several years ago.  It produced zero induction under identical test conditions that he used with his rectangular coil.

However, tangential(?) induction is possible in that, when the axis of the coil and the axis of the moving induction source are at right angles.  This topology produces primarily unipolar waveforms.

Regards,
Pm
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2023
I totally agree!  Attached is a pix of a circular coil on a 3D printed bobbin that I used to test Peng's tangential induction theory several years ago.  It produced zero induction under identical test conditions that he used with his rectangular coil.

However, tangential(?) induction is possible in that, when the axis of the coil and the axis of the moving induction source are at right angles.  This topology produces primarily unipolar waveforms.

Regards,
Pm

Well done!  O0


His experiment with "A 1.95 m long solenoid exerting Aharonov-Bohm force on a coil" is also doubtful. You really need a much longer solenoid, or a toroidal coil, to reduce the external magnetic field sufficiently, and check for magnetic leakage.

Also his analysis of the "Continuous rotation of a circular coil experiment" is wrong. He forgot that there is a radial conductor which is subjected to the Lorentz force and it is this conductor which makes the coil rotate.

Sorry for pointing this site too quickly, the more I read the more I find the experiments inconclusive. He has ideas, but the rigor of the implementation is quite insufficient to reach his conclusions.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4028
Might be good to pass along other results so as to guide him ?( at his you tube channel?)
It is encouraging to see him investigate the “what if’s”?

Who knows where such encouragement could go ?
If he has other ideas invite him to discussion?
Respectfully
Chet K
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2690
F6FLT
Quote
But his experiment lacks care. It is clear that since the coil is rectangular, when he rotates it in a plane perpendicular to the plane of the cylindrical magnet, there will be some variation in flux through the coil.
A perfectly circular coil with small windings cross-section would be required.

Indeed, the rectangular coil is first thing I noticed and wondered what Peng was thinking. As Faraday said, it doesn't matter how the field change occurs only that it does.

It would be easy to get distracted looking at the lump sum of the rectangular coil and supposing it's similar to a more uniform circular coil when it's not. In reality only some part of the conductor needs to experience a field change not the whole thing to be induced.

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
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-06-21, 03:04:58