how much energy is in the magnetic field of one iron atom?

[david]

I found this article about electric field controlled permeability

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsami.0c12765#

Unfortunately they are not searching for free energy in this article

[Verpies]

Here is the full article for other members.

The NiZn/PMN-PT ferrite described in this article increases its magnetic permeability as the electric field is applied, which is the opposite behavior to anything I had ever encountered.

[chief kolbacict]

How are you going to remove electrons from Iron without quintillions of Volts and huge electric forces ?

Alas, two spheres spaced 1 meter apart and charged to 1 Coulomb each will electrically repel with a force equivalent to the weight of over 91.5 thousand metric tons. ( see this ).

Well. And we don't know how to make a super-powerful press. And one is in our hands. 
The question is only how to make ideal insulator,to keep,keep a huge charge from electrical breaking down.

Okay, just thinking out loud. Don't take this seriously.

[david]

this Ferroelectric stuff is still clouding my brain. i try to make sense of it but the closer you look the more things come up that need to be considered. it's so god damn tiring.

what i have come up with is that you have a molecule that has an electric and a magnetic dipole. having those two dipoles means that it has electric Permittivity and magnetic Permeability properties. then you have to ask yourself how are those dipoles aligned to each other. does it mean that both properties influence each other? could a strong enough magnetic field change the electric permittivity of the material? what would that entail? like what would happen if you have a charged capacitor with this material as dielectricum and you put it into a strong magnetic field? could the torque of the magnetic dipoles overpower the electric dipoles (i guess it could if you dont "mega" charge the capacitor)? but the electric dipoles are part of Permittivity and also the energy equation of the capacitor. does that mean it would steal energy out of the capacitor when the electric dipoles are no longer aligned with the electric field? but when we charged the capacitor we had to put in more energy to create this alignment.

its all so confusing. please someone help.

[chief kolbacict]

I sometime ago carried out an experiment with ceramic titanat barium capacitor .It hadn't any charge .I placed it between two coils. To coils was applied pulse of large current.
They told me that on terminals the capacitor will be pulse of voltage. But there was  no anything. 

[david]

I sometime ago carried out an experiment with ceramic titanat barium capacitor .It hadn't any charge .I placed it between two coils. To coils was applied pulse of large current.
They told me that on terminals the capacitor will be pulse of voltage. But there was  no anything. 

i dont know what properties titanat barium has and if my weird thoughts with double dipoles can apply to this but in order to get charges on the electrodes of the capacitor i feel like you have to connect both electrodes during the pulse and quickly open them after the pulse. if the pulse polarizes the dielectric charges need to be able to flow from one electrode to the other. you can't do that by measuring voltage (high internal resistance).

[chief kolbacict]

Well.  I'll try it on. I presume if terminals of our capacitor will be simply short circuit,it must be current pulse. 

[Verpies]

They told me that on terminals the capacitor will be pulse of voltage. But there was  no anything. 

The member of this forum "partzman" has recently described a similar experiment that ended up with a voltage across a capacitor.
Ask him for details.

[Verpies]

i dont know what properties titanat barium has

Barium Titanate is a high-k dielectric, ferroelectric and piezoelectric and some more...

...and if my weird thoughts with double dipoles

It is simplistic.  Read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoelectric_effect

[david]

It is simplistic.  Read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoelectric_effect

but no one who has access to this stuff has ever tried to make an energy creating device even if it is simplistic. It seems like most people are too afraid to test for "free energy". they dont want to taint their reputation or they are convinced it doesnt work so its useless to test it.

where do i get the most magnetoelectric material from? i really want to try something simple and cheap. something with a permanent magnet on a rotating axis, the magnetoelectric material between two electrodes and some crude high voltage circuit to switch the magnetic alignment of the magnetoelectric material and voila - you should have an electric motor.

[Verpies]

...they don't want to taint their reputation or they are convinced it doesnt work so its useless to test it.

I try to comment only about technical stuff and stay away from psychology and sociology.

where do i get the most magnetoelectric material from?

Everywhere.  Even some of the off-the-shelf ferrite cores exhibit these properties.
The problem is that these properties are not listed in their datasheets, so you cannot just ask the salesmen whether a given material is magnetoelectric.

The best you can do is make a test jig and test random cores until you find one with a significant magnetoelectric factor.
The more difficult path is to manufacture such core yourself according to the methods published in scientific papers.

[Verpies]

where do i get the most magnetoelectric material from?

The attached document lists some compounds which have the properties you seek.

[david]

Hi verpies,

thank you for another contribution. you do bring technical infos to these topics

unfortunately those documents are a hard read for me. i dont see a way to extract information from it. The formulas on page 7 look nice but i could never figure out the energy balance when everything is linked together in a real setup.

the question i'm most concerned with is - what does the multiferroic material have to do in a somewhat self-explanatory test setup to give us overunity? what setup would give the best demonstration and could be reproduced easily?

the crazy thing is - in my mind a real overuntiy machine would always self destruct after some time because of excess energy build up unless... no wait - you just have to not make a feedback loop. controlling circuit and power output circuit must never be connected

the most simple design would be... a capacitor with a magnetoelectric material as dielectric. this is the controlling circuit. then we wrap a coil around this capacitor and this would be the power output circuit.

now we want the output circuit "create" more energy than we need for the controlling circuit... i just can't... i'm braining too hard again.

p.s. who's selling a chunk of solid Bismuth Ferrite. i only saw it in powder form

[chief kolbacict]

the crazy thing is - in my mind a real overuntiy machine would always self destruct after some time because of excess energy build up unless... no wait - you just have to not make a feedback loop. controlling circuit and power output circuit must never be connected

Then it is worth carefully studying the cases of explosions in various equipment. Laboratory and industrial. Cases for which no trivial explanation was found. And where there were no obvious chemical explosives present.  There must be free energy involved.

[Verpies]

unfortunately those documents are a hard read for me. i dont see a way to extract information from it.

In that case, endeavor to increase your scientific English skills.
The important takeaway from this document is that two types of Multiferroic materials exist.  In one of them, the electric and magnetic properties are strongly coupled to each other ...and in the other - they are not.
Ask yourself: Which one do you like more ?

The formulas on page 7 look nice but i could never figure out the energy balance when everything is linked together in a real setup.

These formulas will not answer your questions - only experimentation will.

in my mind a real overunity machine would always self destruct after some time because of excess energy build up

Not necessarily.  There are plenty of phenomena in existence that self-limit power.
The simplest one is P=i²R, which is tantamount to stating that as the current increases, the thermal power losses increase parabolically.
Here is an example of how this phenomenon limits power in magnetic pulse motors.

the most simple design would be... a capacitor with a magnetoelectric material as dielectric. this is the controlling circuit. then we wrap a coil around this capacitor and this would be the power output circuit.

Just because you change the magnetic permeability of the material inside a coil does not mean that the magnetic flux penetrating that coil arises spontaneously and current is induced in the coil.
Magnetic Permeability <> Magnetic Flux.

You need something similar to this to vary the flux through a coil.

[david]

Hi verpies,

i assume we need "strong" electric and magnetic coupling. Not even strong - we need "overunity" coupling so to speak. This is the only idea we have where "overunity" could happen but anyone with a science degree would never look for such a thing. When they write their mathematical formulas they always adhere to laws of energy conversation. i dont know if anyone could write a formula that "creates" energy in one of it's terms.

somehow you would also have to take into account that such formula would "destroys" energy when numbers are plugged in the other way around. symmetry you know. that would be the only saving qualtity of such a formula.

Not necessarily.  There are plenty of phenomena in existence that self-limit power.
The simplest one is P=i2R, which is tantamount to stating that as the current increases, the thermal power losses increase parabolically.
Here is an example of how this phenomenon limits power in magnetic pulse motors.

well - heat build up would also destroy your device

Just because you change the magnetic permeability of the material inside a coil does not mean that the magnetic flux penetrating that coil arises spontaneously and current is induced in the coil.
Magnetic Permeability <> Magnetic Flux.

but you dont change the permeability. in my mind you change the magnetic order/alignment of your molecules. the molecules of Multiferroic materials have magnetic and electric dipols. apply a field and the dipols react to it. when you apply both magnetic and electric field the one who generates more torgue wins.

but now i get stuck on crediting energy to the fields and torgue and how overunity could actually manifest itself

[F6FLT]

... This is the only idea we have where "overunity" could happen but anyone with a science degree would never look for such a thing. When they write their mathematical formulas they always adhere to laws of energy conversation. i dont know if anyone could write a formula that "creates" energy in one of it's terms.
...

Science is not about finding what some people believe or dream, but about modeling the real world we live in.

Physicists have one big flaw, unlike believers: they take the time to compare their theories with observations, and reject anything that doesn't conform to the facts.

I'm sure that once you've produced an unmistakable experiment with blatant results of "overunity", physicists will change their equations, they're just waiting for facts, not dreams or interpretations of facts.

but you dont change the permeability. in my mind you change the magnetic order/alignment of your molecules. the molecules of Multiferroic materials have magnetic and electric dipols. apply a field and the dipols react to it. when you apply both magnetic and electric field the one who generates more torgue wins.

The parametric system method has been around for ages. Change the permeability or permittivity, and the magnetic energy contained in an inductor or the electrical energy contained in a capacitor will increase. It's magic, all you have to do is change a parameter, as the equations show.
Except that parametric modifications always have an energy cost. For example, reducing the capacitance of a capacitor to increase its energy by the virtue that W=1/2.Q²/C requires moving the plates apart, and therefore providing mechanical work against the Coulomb force, which is easy to calculate as being equal to the additional electrical energy. Nothing is gained. With inductors, it's the same. This is the case for everything currently known, and is easily explained when we seek to understand the physics of effects at the elementary level, rather than sticking to simple engineering equations like W=1/2.Q²/C.

[broli]

Physicists have one big flaw, unlike believers: they take the time to compare their theories with observations, and reject anything that doesn't conform to the facts.

I find it interesting that you point this out as a flaw. Perhaps both physicists and dreamers can learn from each other strengths and weaknesses? As even 'facts' can become quite fluid in science if you look at the placebo effect for instance.

At the end of the day the common man or women does not care about 'facts', they care about living in comfort primarily and secondary they care about some higher meaning:). It's we the ego driven 'fact' chasers that pretend their goals are noble by meanwhile mimicking and stealing ideas which were provided freely by nature to then let our ego's go rampant by thinking we are better than others and start looking down on 'lesser' people.

Physicists or dreamers, I think we should let go of silly labels and just look at what ideas work to advance us and what don't using each others shared skill set. And both sides have their rotten apples, the ones that would rather sit on a comfortable throne as leaders and preachers rather than be dreamers and workers. Plenty of rich 'podcasters' out there in any field proving this point. I believe every student was a dreamer once, why else would they have chosen their path. But somewhere along the line dreams come crashing down and that is just sad. Dreamers and workers can transform the world if the right balance is met by setting aside their differences. I believe Game Theory is a very valuable tool in such endeavor.

[chief kolbacict]

if you look at the placebo effect for instance.

That's right. It works. You can refuse heating by telling yourself that I'm warm. You can draw a bowl of food upper the fire on a canvas and imagine that it is real. I live that. But Americans and Europeans are mired in real comfort and do not want to give it up.

[F6FLT]

...Perhaps both physicists and dreamers can learn from each other strengths and weaknesses?
...

Physicists can be dreamers too, and I'd go so far as to say that the best physicists are dreamers too.
But you missed the point of what I said: "they take the time to compare their theories with observations, and reject anything that doesn't conform to the facts". The placebo effect is a fact, objectively assessable.

The difference between a physicist and a pure dreamer is only there, in the method. In this way, the dreams of the former can become reality, you can go to the moon or communicate remotely via radio waves.
In free energy, we mostly have dreamers, pure dreamers who for ages have been rehashing their old legends about Tesla or Kapanadze, marvelling as if at the novelty of any conventional fact, and of course getting nowhere.
My labels serve to distinguish between the two. Those unable to make a selection should turn to religion. After all, the dream that praying to an all-powerful god could be effective in obtaining anything including free energy is a dream like any other, isn't it? So we should keep it too? and endlessly assert, as in the Kapanadze case, that if it doesn't work, it's because we haven't used the right practices, haven't prayed properly?...
Physics is all about putting labels on realities: the laws of physics. And it works. Mixing everything up, on the pretext that anything would be equal to or could be equal to anything, gets you nowhere.

[broli]

Physicists can be dreamers too, and I'd go so far as to say that the best physicists are dreamers too.
But you missed the point of what I said: "they take the time to compare their theories with observations, and reject anything that doesn't conform to the facts". The placebo effect is a fact, objectively assessable.

The difference between a physicist and a pure dreamer is only there, in the method. In this way, the dreams of the former can become reality, you can go to the moon or communicate remotely via radio waves.
In free energy, we mostly have dreamers, pure dreamers who for ages have been rehashing their old legends about Tesla or Kapanadze, marvelling as if at the novelty of any conventional fact, and of course getting nowhere.
My labels serve to distinguish between the two. Those unable to make a selection should turn to religion. After all, the dream that praying to an all-powerful god could be effective in obtaining anything including free energy is a dream like any other, isn't it? So we should keep it too? and endlessly assert, as in the Kapanadze case, that if it doesn't work, it's because we haven't used the right practices, haven't prayed properly?...
Physics is all about putting labels on realities: the laws of physics. And it works. Mixing everything up, on the pretext that anything would be equal to or could be equal to anything, gets you nowhere.

To be honest I don't subscribe to either schools or 'sides' as both have daggers and if care is not taken stabbing will ensue. I believe a respectful balance can be made between any side if it can collectively pull all forward, you can believe in nothing and never go forward or you can believe in everything and fail to achieve anything. At the end of the day what makes anything 'real' and enter the 'real' space is by becoming a tangible physical device/technology/toy/experiment/art... that anyone can see, touch, feel, smell, hear, replicate, experience, confirm and enjoy for themselves that someone has pored their heart and soul into making it. Regardless of the source that brought it and their belief system. Science and knowledge have historically always been an aggregation of many contributors holding different belief systems across the entire world. I have many of my own beliefs, theories, and even 'truths' but even those change almost on a daily basis and sometimes get erased or rephrased and still I often conclude with 'I don't know'. As I have no way to provide evidence or proof for any of them. But our ego often gets ahead of us and that is when the slip ups occur.

Forcing others to 'believe' you is an even more foolish and dangerous endeavor. Ideas and words can be infectious and lead to cultish hive mind behavior and followers. Followers that are often, and sadly, used as mere pawns to satisfy an ego. Following someone is not bad not everyone has the capacity or even ambition to lead. But followers must also be careful of ego's that will lead them off a cliff. A good mantra is to perhaps not judge someone on their beliefs, theories or their words but on the actions they take. To me any belief system can have great value, its golden nuggets so to speak, and its a matter of respectfully taking what works for you and leaving what doesn't, which can be different for everyone. But either side yelling and fighting over THE TRUE belief system will help no one move forward. People should stop trying to change each other and their belief systems. Take what works for you and leave what doesn't work for you and move forward, it's not rocket science.

And on Tesla as the person, besides his current 'followers' keeping his story alive I do believe Tesla's story is a sad one and perhaps and often misunderstood one. Many times I wondered what Tesla did wrong to end up befriending and falling in love with a pigeon. I wondered why the world treated Tesla the way it did back then. Was he really just ahead of his time? Where his ideas too big of a scope for the investors at the time? Was human greed the main culprit? Did he become paranoid? Or did he just go crazy?

There could be some elements of truth in each of these. However I do not believe these were the main cause for his ultimate demise. I believe Tesla's story is about betrayal. I believe he felt, and what seemed to have been a constant stream of betrayal, from his environment and as a result decided to completely isolate himself and his heart from it by no longer sharing and no longer moving forward. But I have no way of knowing for sure. However If true then this is a truly tragic story if you ask me. Perhaps if Tesla worked and shared his work in a more loving and forgiving environment our world would have looked significantly different by now.

People will always hurt and betray each other regardless of their intentions, personality, relationship or belief system. Not being able to love, forgive and forget will keep everyone crawling on the dirty floor like little helpless babies no matter what new 'leader' comes.