The comments below are more interesting than the video. The answer to "What's doing the work?" ALWAYS depends on how far back and how far away in time and space one defines one's system. If "t=0" for the experiment begins when you release the ball then obviously, the magnets do work. Do car engines do work? Most people would say yes, but if t=0 occurs when you filled up the gas tank then the gas+air does the work and if t=0 occurred long ago then Earth's gravity and/or the sun did the work.
My own view is that the question of "What's doing the work?" is best addressed moment-by-moment using differentials. IUPAC put out a great thermodynamics paper a few years ago to standardize the nomenclature for doing this. Google "IUPAC Alberty 2001" and click the first PDF you find. Don't be put off by the paper's title. It emphasizes chemical themo, but work from other things like gravitational potential and magnetic field strength are correctly handled in section 1.3. Enjoy!
You have precisely the mindset that we in the open source community are looking for and have correctly identified the purpose of this video. It is nearly impossible to treat energy transforms as entirely closed systems, especially when they involve infinite fields such as gravity and magnetism. Have you seen my magnetically assisted pendulum video?
Right after the "brain fart" comment you should've said "... about an inch off the top of the track we could cut a hole in the track and let the gravity do the work". Then it would have been a valid statement that actually works. You've come one step away from the solution...
Physics taught us that static magnetic fields are conservative. This means the forces at play are independant of the path taken. Therefore, if you end where you start, the force theoretically nets to zero. Now, dynamic or changing magnetic fields are not held to this rule. This is where Einstein scratched his head because it becomes a matter of reference. A moving magnet seems to act the same as a changing field. Also search Faraday Paradox. ;-)
This would be more impressive if you made a circular track and kept the ball going indefinitely... unfortunately, then you would see the flaw in your logic.
Lol, I see we have another who fails to watch the entire video.
Since magnetism is considered a conservative force, the scientific calculation for the work performed is independant of the path taken. A circular path would equal zero work according to the scientific logic applied to magnetic forces. Do you see a flaw in this logic?
Finsrud's device works on unrelated principles. Sorry, I had been watching a bunch of perpetual motion garbage that night and lumped you in with those doofuses (doofie?).
Finsrud's device has a long pendulum down the center of the pedestal. Almost imperceptible to human eyes is the elevation change in the track. The weight of the sphere (approx 3Lbs)keeps the large pendulum orbiting. This is where the magnetics comes into play. As the sphere moves under the magnet it is lightened by the magnetic force (its weight [not mass] is reduced). The energy exchange transfers to the pendulum. The 3 other pendulae are for speed regulation. Does earths orbit play any part?
As you can probably ascertain from the prefix ferro relates to iron (Fe). In the US the term 'marble' is a generic term given to any of small spherical objects generally of a stone, glass or metal material. By combining the term we isolate the material to an iron constituent and thus imply that the object is a sphere with some iron content. The term ferro is also akin to ferromagnetic as opposed to ferri which is different. My use here implies specifically to a ferromagnetic sphere.
It is slowing down. To increase of magnetic force as the road furthers will make the travel speed continuous or accelerating. Then the only labor to do is to release the ball of the last magnet's force and bring it back to the beginning. That's the same as bringing weight up a building and to drop it each time.
No comprehendo. Diodes are, by definition, monopolor. One end is positive and the other negative. Any other arangement wouldn't be a diode I reckon. If the poles switch than it ain't no diode. If both poles are the same, it ain'no diode. If the two ends don't stay the same polarity, yer dang diode just burnt out and should be replaced.
In this case we are discussing magnetic poles not terminals.;-). In the monopolar magnetic diode The flux for one of the magnetic poles on a specially shaped magnet is fully contained internal to the device while the flux for its counter pole is exposed externally. This effectivly creates a monopolar reactive flux zone capable of accelerating a ferromagnetic target without the dipolar deceleration. A ferromarble will accelerate through the diode tunnel and keep on going.
Thanks. I haven't had the privelege of reading anything approaching your talent for humor use fion a very LONG time. snicker... I especially liked the sentence... "This effectivly creates a monopolar reactive flux zone capable of accelerating a ferromagnetic target without the dipolar deceleration." Now THAT takes imagination wotrhy of publication. I should ask... chuckle... how do ya git them liddle buggers ta git tagether and flux whenever ya wanna watch 'em?
I certainly feel honoured to have offered you such a grand privelege. It pleases me that you are able to extract humor and even develop a chuckle where none was intended. Kudos on your cavilier approach to things you need explained for comprehension. If I had more time I would take great delight in educating you and increasing your knowledge and training. In fact, if you feel you are worthy, I may at least help you build a solid foundation. For starters: What do you know of HYMU "80"?
You are making is more complicated that it needs to be... Lets say the ball is attracted to the first magnet with force X at a distance of one inch. If the second magnet is 2 inches from the first what is the net force on the ball when it is one inch from the second magnet?
Maybe this analogy will help, Think of a section of roller coaster track. Down is toward a magnet and up is away. You place the car (ball) on the highest point at the start. It travels 'down' to the first magnet and the momentum carries past it then 'up'. If it has enough momentum it will reach a point exactly between the two magnets.
This distance must be less than the initial distance it dropped to the first magnet or it will 'fall' back to the first magnet. Then it accelerates to the second magnet, but with less momentum because the second drop was lower than the first. This repeats until you reach the last magnet, the force needed to excape it is the same as the first.
So you have a ball dropping from a 'high' hill going through a series of smaller hills and ending with a rise as high as the first drop. The best you could hope for with no friction losses would be the ball reaching the same distance from the last magnet as it was when released form the first. I wish I could explain this better but hope this has enough information the help you understand
That is one way of looking at it however it is does not exactly relate to this video. More correctly the analogy should be that the coaster car has antigravity for all subsequent hills until the momentum of the car can no longer carry it and comes to rest at the bottom of a valley.
"More correctly the analogy should be that the coaster car has antigravity for all subsequent hills"
Not really, think of an object passing between two planets. No anti-gravity is involved. The ball is never 'pushed' only 'pulled down' in different vectors. My analogy is correct, pull is only 'down'.
No the first and last hills are larger. The pull on the ball to the first magnet is greater than the net pull from the second because a 180 Deg. force is applied from the first magnet.
This video demonstrates that the second dipole (negative attraction related to the momentum vector of the ball) can be cancelled. Consequently, the initial momentum is allowed to continue unrestricted by my magnetic forces until it reaches the end of the track.
I wouldn't say it was canceled, postponed would be a better word. Between the first and last magnet the ball effectively coasts. Except for increased friction loss between the ball and track due to the vector pull of the magnets.
Ha Ha, Nooooo... After the inital force ie to the center of the first magnet there is no net 'forward' force applied! Each magnet pulls with same force in each direction, they cancle each other out F=0.
Balls don't just "Coast" anywhere. Especially not fast enough to escape the force that started 'em coastin'. And not even with the help of yonder magnet. Unless, of course the ball got a little boost right off the starting blocks by someone giving it a big PUSH!!! In which case, it would probably make it to the finish line better without magnets impeding it's progress.
imyyz4u wrote: "Well you go one thing right, the pull from the magnets increase the friction between the ball and track."
Sorry imyyz4u, but in this case they acutally work toward elevating the sphere thereby reducing friction. This can be observed when the sphere leaves the track and sticks to the point of elevation on the magnet.
There have been many, many,...many misunderstandings related to these two videos. Please view both completely before commenting. Hopefully this will prevent you from foolishly humiliating yourself as DP and others have in their assumptions.
Regarding a looped system: Search Finsrud, its already been done. However when I get some time I'll machine some HYMU 80 and demonstrate how this works - For now I have other projects pending. Cheers, Harvey
I was stoned on my ass and just messing with you. I barely remember those posts ;-)
I will say that force in any field (magnetic, electrostatic or gravitational) change with position.. Placing the metal ball near the magnet is no different than using a weight (gravity) to do work. The machine you are using is analogous to a pendulum in which the pivot point is allowed to move with the bob. I really don't know what you are trying to prove...
You'll notice in Finsrud's art piece he uses magnets to raise the ball and subsequently the track in a rythmic pattern. By using three pendulums, two always over power the one. He also has a fourth pendulum in the center to assist in raising the track which causes the ball to roll downhill. This combination of forces provides a continuous wave for the ball to ride on.
If I could provide a means to prevent the magnet from trapping the ball, then what would we have? Since the only reason it becomes trapped is because of the secondary field is there a way to quench it?
That would remove both the forces. The magnet in conjuction with the track provides two force vectors. Each which points to highest flux density where it intersects the track. By equalizing or quenching entirely the trailing negaive (relative to momemtum vector)density we provide a means to escape the field and maintain momentum.
What you fail to understand is the nature of magnets and how they function. Your steel ball near a magnet effectively 'shorts out' some of the lines of force and reduces the strength of the field. This means the magnet is 'weaker' with the ball near it than when it is farther away. The ball moves from a higher energy level to a lower one. You should be able to figure out your mistake now.
Thank you imyyz4u for your input. You are correct that the ferrous ball shunts the field. However this does not change the magnetic strength in proximity to the ball in the way you think. Actually, the ball moves from a lower strength to a higher strength because of the curvature of space known as the 'lines' of force. The ball moves in the direction of the closer gaps. A triangular shunt can spread these out like a prism and cancel the effect.
I said 'shorts out' to it keep it simple. I'll step it up a notch... When the ball is in the permanent magnet's field a magnetic field is induced into it. The ball becomes a magnet also. This induced field is always opposite to the permanent magnet. This reversed field N to S S to N cancels out part of the permanent magnet's field.
All transformers other than 1:1 can be used as buck/boost. The more common term however is step-up or step-down. The buck/boost term is typically applied supply line applications. As far as the demonstration goes there are multiple dynamics at play during the acceleration. Included in this is the electric field expanded in the conductive ball. Because the ball moves on the track eddy currents (though minute) do flow in the ball and track. However, there is no buck. Opposites attract.
I'm not talking about eddy currents, the orientation of the atoms change like in the permanent magnet. Some of the residual magnetism remains for a time in the ball.
You know that if you place a piece of iron next to a permanent magnet it will become one also? And it should be obvious that the field is in the opposite direction.
What else can I say. Except it is 5:30 AM and I have not been to bed yet... Good Night :-}
"N to S S to N cancels out part of the permanent magnet's field."
I mistook what you said here. I thought you were saying it diminished the strength of the magnet. My mistake. During the attraction the shape of the field changes because there is a better pathway. But the force actually becomes stronger in space between the attracting poles because the density in this area becomes increased as it is taken away from the surrounding area.
No, the field is not always opposite. It depends on the material. You may want to research the differences between diamagnetism and paramagnetism with regard to moving flux.
Nobel? Nope, I haven't done anything new. I've just demonstrated that dipoles can be arranged to allow work to be done over a greater distance and to transfer momentum to an object that leaves the field. This is old 1890's stuff. The work is performed at the cost of trapping the target in the field, not by the PE of the person.
In "self perpetuating power plant doesn't" which my two videos responded to, you wrongly claim that permanent magnets cannot do work. I felt compelled to challenge that assertion and show that they can and do perform work. Furthermore, just as a diode can block electron flow in one direction there is also a way to cancel the second dipole. This I will demonstrate when people are ready and willing to see it.
Ok Desertphile, lets take this to another level. You have consistently argued that energy is being added from outside the system. Fine, where would you like your cutoff reference to be? Your arm? The Food you ate? How far back do you want to go? I have clearly defined the parameters of my demonstrations and it is you that keeps trying deceive the viewers.
In video 2 there are essentially 3 stages. In the primary stage we have an inital acceleration with a conservation of momentum. In the secondary stage we have increased acceleration due to stronger magnets (this is quickly neutralized by the incline). In the tertiary stage we see a very strong acceleration (where the target hits the plate) immediately followed by the pullback of the opposite dipole. The work from ...
... this tertiary accelertation is divided between the negative field cancellation and the kinetic transfer to the second target (which is then neutralized quickly by the incline i.e. gravity & friction).
The end run at rest values show target 1 with +GPe, -Mpe, 0Ke, 15"D and target 2 with 0+GPe, 0MPe, 0Ke, 0D. From this we can see that some of the -MPe is traded for altitude and distance. Since Work does not have energy in its equation we can see W=Fd applies and holds regardless of starting or ending potential or kinetic energy. Likewise, the work done to trigger the action is less then the work done during the action and is thus amplified.
Post Script: Just so you understand. Your test setup there would produce more energy out than in. But it wouldn't win the Nobel. This is because the energy out is traded for the negative field in the tertiary stage. To win the Nobel we have to apply it to a closed system which this is not.
This is all wrong. Put the railing into a circle, drop a bearing anywhere in it, and your stupid, uneducated, willfully ignorant notions are demonstrated incorrect.
*Sigh* Another one who fails to watch BOTH of the videos all the through. Nothing I have indicated breaks any laws of physics nor is there any claim to energy 'creation' nor is there any claim to a closed system. Permanent Magnets Doing Work. Thats it.
That work requires energy put into the system: you deny the fact that your arm put that energy into the system--- therefore NotSoOldHippy is correct and you are lying. By the way, you linked the videos to my video that debunked a "free energy" video that does claim to generate energy: you also claim that debunking is wrong. Why are you lying here?
Nice experiment. However, you obviously lack the theoretical background to interpret the observations made in that experiment correctly. Desertphile explained correctly what really happens in his reply video. Generally it's a good idea to perform your own experiments if you want to learn something about physics, but you need at least a little bit of theoretical knowledge to interpret your observations. Maybe reading a book or two might help
There are two videos. And no, I don't lack the theoretical background. Nor do I have any need to qualify my experience. Desertphile is very mistaken in his answer. And by the way...his hook is stainless, thats why it doesn't rust. But the carbon is not organized quite the same so it is magnetic stainless.
Once again, everything I state in the video is supported by physics. If you don't understand then say so. If you do understand it then we agree. I would be happy to explain it to you if necessary. W=Fd Work = Force times distance. Magnetic Force * distance of track = work performed. Whether or not more work is needed in setup or reset is not in question here.
"...everything I state in the video is supported by physics."
No. All of physics, both the laws and the theory and all of physicists, state you are wrong. You have already been told why: you just lack the courage to admit it.
The problem here is that Desertphile jumped to a conclusion that contradicts the demonstrators stipulations. And now he is trying to cover his tracks.
If you take money from gullible rubes, it's a charge of immorality. If you're just an ignorant spewer of occult superstition, the charge is merely one of sadly being human.
The reason i follow peoples results in these videos is to see the possible manipulations possible with magnets. Sure you cannot rule out the entire process to give you overunity or anything as such, but the test do show some ways to use magnets that could prove to be useful. *ahem* in an enviroment were work is present.
you appear to be quite ignorant when it comes to the fields of science you are talking about and/or the scientific method.
the theories already entirely cover all of reality that you have available in your garage. if you want to discover something new, build a relativistic particle acellerator that can compete with the LHC. or something like that.
Oh now see, you jumped to a conclusion. Shame on you. And, you didn't see the scientific data provided in the link. Can you please get me a signed affidavit of a scientist explaining what a magnetic field or even flux for that matter really is?...*crickets* I thought so - they are still trying to learn what He already knows.
Your nomenclature is offensive. And this post will eventually be deleted. However magnetism is not fully understood. Electron spin is assumed to be the cause. But in reality this could be an effect instead. Not all negatively charged particles have a magnetic field. I have studied all of the terms listed from 1972 onward.
Yes they do. Thats why the ball rolls a greater distance and even uphill. It's called work (your defintion). There is an applied force for a given distance and the force is not from my arm. It is magnetic force. Period.
Nobody said it was: I said the energy added to the system came from your arm, barring heat. F=ma, where a=potential energy (kinetic) imparted by your hand.
"Thats why the ball rolls a greater distance and even uphill."
The balls rolled up-hill because you imparted 100% of the energy for them to do so. Nobody said force came from your arm: everyone told you the ENERGY came from your arm. Magnetic force cannot produce energy: it only converts energy. You have confused force with energy.
Your words are becoming less and less meaningful. The acceleration comes from the magnetic force acting upon the mass of the ball. Nothing else. You have been debunked on this matter in every post I provided. Your opinion on the matter does not change the truth. Nor does your belief. I don't ask you to change your belief because that is up to you. I just present the evidence and the truth speak for itself.
"The acceleration comes from the magnetic force acting upon the mass of the ball."
Which is why you had to place the bearing within a pole of one of the magnets. --smile-- You have no idea what you're talking about and it's likely that your willful ignorance is occultism predicated.
No offense taken. :) However, you have quite blindly overlooked the magnetic force accelerating the ball over a distance. According to newtonian physics this is work.
"and Permanent Magnets are doing the work as shown"
No. Put the rail into a circle and you will note that your finger does the work. Desertphile explained the simple science behind why your notions are mistaken. I believe that your occult superstitions are keepoing you from accepting the observed laws of science.
Each increase in accleration is given at the cost of reduced magnetic potential. This is clearly stipulated to at then end of video 2. However, if the final dipole was neutralized, wouldn't you agree that momentum could be conserved?
Quite to the contrary. By putting the rail in a circle we learn that not only does the finger not perform the work but the opposite pole of the magnet performs addtional work in decelerating the ball. (This is why closed system do not function with dipoles)
Let stupid people be stupid. If someone believes something that is false or against your ideas. There is no shame in making your point. Which the person(s) may listen too, or may not.
However simply pointing and saying you are wrong or displaying a simple demonstration will not hinder these people from trying to make progress.
I like it becuase it causes people to use scientific method and maybe they will find some good stuff... just prolly not what they were lookin for
The problem is that these stupid people don't all believe their own claims: they just make their bullshit claims to deceive people into buying their worthless devices, blueprints, magnets, etc. I saw one ass had placed such a device on EBay and the buyer has refused to pay for it, having watched my video after bidding on it. Ask me for details if interested.
If someone is trying to sell BS. I'm all for people saying hey this guy is selling a load of sh1t.
I tend to believe though that people would not think they can make money off of free energy.. hence the term free.
Obviously anyone trying to make money off it is full of it.
Sure if the guy is trying to sell a contraption that does not do or live up to its use by all means continue. If it's funtime playing science let them play.
So, apart from your use of vulgarity there are some redeeming qualities in you. You are the protector of the gullable. For that I commend you. However, your errors stand.
"What is wrong with testing something most people call fact?"
You clowns insist on claiming the world isn't as humanity knows it to be. It is like you and your "free energy" cultists claiming 2+2 does not always equal 4. The video shows the clown who make it doesn't understand WTF he's doing.
But besides annoying your existance what are these people gonna do to effect overall science belief? Yes some people would seemingly need guidance but heck why try and take away the world art of natural selection.
If we are doomed to take steps backwards for the inability of people to look over the facts and make up there own minds... well then the step must be taken.
"you appear to be quite ignorant when it comes to the fields of science you are talking about and/or the scientific method."
That is the case with most of these "free energy" cult believers. They reject basic physics and insist the world's entire community of physicists are wrong.... yet they cannot show, or explain, why or how.
"You need to get as high on your soap box as you can before He humbles you."
Who is "he?"
I viewed this video and I am astonished you do not see, or merely claim you do not see, where the energy is coming from. I kind of wonder if you are pretending to believe it comes from the magnetics: you video shows it does not. I have made a reply video.
Nobody claims magnets cannot produce work. The issue is that some people, such as yourself, have claimed magnets can produce work due to their own magnetic fields, without energy being added--- they cannot.
I like your research.
magneticpower1 11 months ago
The comments below are more interesting than the video. The answer to "What's doing the work?" ALWAYS depends on how far back and how far away in time and space one defines one's system. If "t=0" for the experiment begins when you release the ball then obviously, the magnets do work. Do car engines do work? Most people would say yes, but if t=0 occurs when you filled up the gas tank then the gas+air does the work and if t=0 occurred long ago then Earth's gravity and/or the sun did the work.
flyingjazz 2 years ago
My own view is that the question of "What's doing the work?" is best addressed moment-by-moment using differentials. IUPAC put out a great thermodynamics paper a few years ago to standardize the nomenclature for doing this. Google "IUPAC Alberty 2001" and click the first PDF you find. Don't be put off by the paper's title. It emphasizes chemical themo, but work from other things like gravitational potential and magnetic field strength are correctly handled in section 1.3. Enjoy!
flyingjazz 2 years ago
You have precisely the mindset that we in the open source community are looking for and have correctly identified the purpose of this video. It is nearly impossible to treat energy transforms as entirely closed systems, especially when they involve infinite fields such as gravity and magnetism. Have you seen my magnetically assisted pendulum video?
Thank you for the link info - I will read it.
Cheers,
=)
AdminOnDuty 2 years ago
Right after the "brain fart" comment you should've said "... about an inch off the top of the track we could cut a hole in the track and let the gravity do the work". Then it would have been a valid statement that actually works. You've come one step away from the solution...
ABCStoreone 2 years ago
Why would a circular path equal 0?
Xjkjk3264X 2 years ago
Physics taught us that static magnetic fields are conservative. This means the forces at play are independant of the path taken. Therefore, if you end where you start, the force theoretically nets to zero. Now, dynamic or changing magnetic fields are not held to this rule. This is where Einstein scratched his head because it becomes a matter of reference. A moving magnet seems to act the same as a changing field. Also search Faraday Paradox. ;-)
AdminOnDuty 2 years ago
This would be more impressive if you made a circular track and kept the ball going indefinitely... unfortunately, then you would see the flaw in your logic.
howajo 3 years ago
Lol, I see we have another who fails to watch the entire video.
Since magnetism is considered a conservative force, the scientific calculation for the work performed is independant of the path taken. A circular path would equal zero work according to the scientific logic applied to magnetic forces. Do you see a flaw in this logic?
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
BTW, Finsrud already created the circular apparatus in 1998. You can search for a video here on You-Tube demonstrating his device.
Cheers :D
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
Finsrud's device works on unrelated principles. Sorry, I had been watching a bunch of perpetual motion garbage that night and lumped you in with those doofuses (doofie?).
howajo 3 years ago
Finsrud's device has a long pendulum down the center of the pedestal. Almost imperceptible to human eyes is the elevation change in the track. The weight of the sphere (approx 3Lbs)keeps the large pendulum orbiting. This is where the magnetics comes into play. As the sphere moves under the magnet it is lightened by the magnetic force (its weight [not mass] is reduced). The energy exchange transfers to the pendulum. The 3 other pendulae are for speed regulation. Does earths orbit play any part?
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
I forgot to ask. What is a "ferromarble" anyway?
nodanno 3 years ago
As you can probably ascertain from the prefix ferro relates to iron (Fe). In the US the term 'marble' is a generic term given to any of small spherical objects generally of a stone, glass or metal material. By combining the term we isolate the material to an iron constituent and thus imply that the object is a sphere with some iron content. The term ferro is also akin to ferromagnetic as opposed to ferri which is different. My use here implies specifically to a ferromagnetic sphere.
Cheers :)
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
It is slowing down. To increase of magnetic force as the road furthers will make the travel speed continuous or accelerating. Then the only labor to do is to release the ball of the last magnet's force and bring it back to the beginning. That's the same as bringing weight up a building and to drop it each time.
phoebus1966 4 years ago
Well said. And that is why I designed the monopolor magnetic diode.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
No comprehendo. Diodes are, by definition, monopolor. One end is positive and the other negative. Any other arangement wouldn't be a diode I reckon. If the poles switch than it ain't no diode. If both poles are the same, it ain'no diode. If the two ends don't stay the same polarity, yer dang diode just burnt out and should be replaced.
nodanno 3 years ago
In this case we are discussing magnetic poles not terminals.;-). In the monopolar magnetic diode The flux for one of the magnetic poles on a specially shaped magnet is fully contained internal to the device while the flux for its counter pole is exposed externally. This effectivly creates a monopolar reactive flux zone capable of accelerating a ferromagnetic target without the dipolar deceleration. A ferromarble will accelerate through the diode tunnel and keep on going.
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
Thanks. I haven't had the privelege of reading anything approaching your talent for humor use fion a very LONG time. snicker... I especially liked the sentence... "This effectivly creates a monopolar reactive flux zone capable of accelerating a ferromagnetic target without the dipolar deceleration." Now THAT takes imagination wotrhy of publication. I should ask... chuckle... how do ya git them liddle buggers ta git tagether and flux whenever ya wanna watch 'em?
nodanno 3 years ago
I certainly feel honoured to have offered you such a grand privelege. It pleases me that you are able to extract humor and even develop a chuckle where none was intended. Kudos on your cavilier approach to things you need explained for comprehension. If I had more time I would take great delight in educating you and increasing your knowledge and training. In fact, if you feel you are worthy, I may at least help you build a solid foundation. For starters: What do you know of HYMU "80"?
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
You are making is more complicated that it needs to be... Lets say the ball is attracted to the first magnet with force X at a distance of one inch. If the second magnet is 2 inches from the first what is the net force on the ball when it is one inch from the second magnet?
imyyz4u 4 years ago
Maybe this analogy will help, Think of a section of roller coaster track. Down is toward a magnet and up is away. You place the car (ball) on the highest point at the start. It travels 'down' to the first magnet and the momentum carries past it then 'up'. If it has enough momentum it will reach a point exactly between the two magnets.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
This distance must be less than the initial distance it dropped to the first magnet or it will 'fall' back to the first magnet. Then it accelerates to the second magnet, but with less momentum because the second drop was lower than the first. This repeats until you reach the last magnet, the force needed to excape it is the same as the first.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
So you have a ball dropping from a 'high' hill going through a series of smaller hills and ending with a rise as high as the first drop. The best you could hope for with no friction losses would be the ball reaching the same distance from the last magnet as it was when released form the first. I wish I could explain this better but hope this has enough information the help you understand
imyyz4u 4 years ago
That is one way of looking at it however it is does not exactly relate to this video. More correctly the analogy should be that the coaster car has antigravity for all subsequent hills until the momentum of the car can no longer carry it and comes to rest at the bottom of a valley.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"More correctly the analogy should be that the coaster car has antigravity for all subsequent hills"
Not really, think of an object passing between two planets. No anti-gravity is involved. The ball is never 'pushed' only 'pulled down' in different vectors. My analogy is correct, pull is only 'down'.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
Regardless, all 5 'hills' in my video are the same size. Go figure... :)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
No the first and last hills are larger. The pull on the ball to the first magnet is greater than the net pull from the second because a 180 Deg. force is applied from the first magnet.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
This video demonstrates that the second dipole (negative attraction related to the momentum vector of the ball) can be cancelled. Consequently, the initial momentum is allowed to continue unrestricted by my magnetic forces until it reaches the end of the track.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
*my should read 'any'
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
I wouldn't say it was canceled, postponed would be a better word. Between the first and last magnet the ball effectively coasts. Except for increased friction loss between the ball and track due to the vector pull of the magnets.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
:))))) You got it!!!
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Because work is defined as w=Fd we effectively increase the work done by 'postponing' the final stop thus increasing 'd'. :)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Ha Ha, Nooooo... After the inital force ie to the center of the first magnet there is no net 'forward' force applied! Each magnet pulls with same force in each direction, they cancle each other out F=0.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
"the ball effectively coasts"
An object in motion tends the remain in motion. No force is applied.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
Balls don't just "Coast" anywhere. Especially not fast enough to escape the force that started 'em coastin'. And not even with the help of yonder magnet. Unless, of course the ball got a little boost right off the starting blocks by someone giving it a big PUSH!!! In which case, it would probably make it to the finish line better without magnets impeding it's progress.
nodanno 3 years ago
Did you click on the 'view all xx comments' below and follow the entire conversation? Either you didn't or you are an idiot...
"Especially not fast enough to escape the force that started 'em coastin'. And not even with the help of yonder magnet."
WRONG!
"it would probably make it to the finish line better without magnets impeding it's progress."
Well you go one thing right, the pull from the magnets increase the friction between the ball and track.
imyyz4u 3 years ago
imyyz4u wrote: "Well you go one thing right, the pull from the magnets increase the friction between the ball and track."
Sorry imyyz4u, but in this case they acutally work toward elevating the sphere thereby reducing friction. This can be observed when the sphere leaves the track and sticks to the point of elevation on the magnet.
Cheers
AdminOnDuty 3 years ago
"what is the net force on the ball when it is one inch from the second magnet?" Just a FYI the force is zero...
imyyz4u 4 years ago
There have been many, many,...many misunderstandings related to these two videos. Please view both completely before commenting. Hopefully this will prevent you from foolishly humiliating yourself as DP and others have in their assumptions.
Regarding a looped system: Search Finsrud, its already been done. However when I get some time I'll machine some HYMU 80 and demonstrate how this works - For now I have other projects pending. Cheers, Harvey
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
I was stoned on my ass and just messing with you. I barely remember those posts ;-)
I will say that force in any field (magnetic, electrostatic or gravitational) change with position.. Placing the metal ball near the magnet is no different than using a weight (gravity) to do work. The machine you are using is analogous to a pendulum in which the pivot point is allowed to move with the bob. I really don't know what you are trying to prove...
imyyz4u 4 years ago
exactly ... the only energy here is potential energy caused by the ball's position relative to the magnetic field.
memoryofakiss 4 years ago
You'll notice in Finsrud's art piece he uses magnets to raise the ball and subsequently the track in a rythmic pattern. By using three pendulums, two always over power the one. He also has a fourth pendulum in the center to assist in raising the track which causes the ball to roll downhill. This combination of forces provides a continuous wave for the ball to ride on.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
If I could provide a means to prevent the magnet from trapping the ball, then what would we have? Since the only reason it becomes trapped is because of the secondary field is there a way to quench it?
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Yank the magnets.
alysdexia 4 years ago
"Yank the magnets"
That would remove both the forces. The magnet in conjuction with the track provides two force vectors. Each which points to highest flux density where it intersects the track. By equalizing or quenching entirely the trailing negaive (relative to momemtum vector)density we provide a means to escape the field and maintain momentum.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
What you fail to understand is the nature of magnets and how they function. Your steel ball near a magnet effectively 'shorts out' some of the lines of force and reduces the strength of the field. This means the magnet is 'weaker' with the ball near it than when it is farther away. The ball moves from a higher energy level to a lower one. You should be able to figure out your mistake now.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
Thank you imyyz4u for your input. You are correct that the ferrous ball shunts the field. However this does not change the magnetic strength in proximity to the ball in the way you think. Actually, the ball moves from a lower strength to a higher strength because of the curvature of space known as the 'lines' of force. The ball moves in the direction of the closer gaps. A triangular shunt can spread these out like a prism and cancel the effect.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
I said 'shorts out' to it keep it simple. I'll step it up a notch... When the ball is in the permanent magnet's field a magnetic field is induced into it. The ball becomes a magnet also. This induced field is always opposite to the permanent magnet. This reversed field N to S S to N cancels out part of the permanent magnet's field.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
Have you ever wired up a buck/boost transformer?
The ball, permanent magnet system is 'wired' in the buck mode.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
All transformers other than 1:1 can be used as buck/boost. The more common term however is step-up or step-down. The buck/boost term is typically applied supply line applications. As far as the demonstration goes there are multiple dynamics at play during the acceleration. Included in this is the electric field expanded in the conductive ball. Because the ball moves on the track eddy currents (though minute) do flow in the ball and track. However, there is no buck. Opposites attract.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
I'm not talking about eddy currents, the orientation of the atoms change like in the permanent magnet. Some of the residual magnetism remains for a time in the ball.
You know that if you place a piece of iron next to a permanent magnet it will become one also? And it should be obvious that the field is in the opposite direction.
What else can I say. Except it is 5:30 AM and I have not been to bed yet... Good Night :-}
imyyz4u 4 years ago
Sleep well. ;-)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Postscript:
So, where do you believe the energy comes from to magnetize the ball? Is it conservative or prolific?
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Have you ever used a Gauss Meter to verify this?
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"Have you ever used a Gauss Meter to verify this?"
I don't need to... if the induced field was the same North to North South to South the metal would repel not attract. Common sense.
imyyz4u 4 years ago
"N to S S to N cancels out part of the permanent magnet's field."
I mistook what you said here. I thought you were saying it diminished the strength of the magnet. My mistake. During the attraction the shape of the field changes because there is a better pathway. But the force actually becomes stronger in space between the attracting poles because the density in this area becomes increased as it is taken away from the surrounding area.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
No, the field is not always opposite. It depends on the material. You may want to research the differences between diamagnetism and paramagnetism with regard to moving flux.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
It is on induction, not on statics.
alysdexia 4 years ago
Yes, thats why the flux is moving.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Start with the ball ON the first magnet.
Then measure the force required to move the ball to the starting point.
THAT is the amount of energy that is coming from OUTSIDE the system.
Revamp the experiment to produce more energy than that, and you got the Nobel.
shockferret 4 years ago 2
Nobel? Nope, I haven't done anything new. I've just demonstrated that dipoles can be arranged to allow work to be done over a greater distance and to transfer momentum to an object that leaves the field. This is old 1890's stuff. The work is performed at the cost of trapping the target in the field, not by the PE of the person.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"...not by the PE of the person."
Liar. You now know better, yet you still state the falsehood. Your emotional investment in an error has make you a desperate liar.
Desertphile 4 years ago
In "self perpetuating power plant doesn't" which my two videos responded to, you wrongly claim that permanent magnets cannot do work. I felt compelled to challenge that assertion and show that they can and do perform work. Furthermore, just as a diode can block electron flow in one direction there is also a way to cancel the second dipole. This I will demonstrate when people are ready and willing to see it.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"...you wrongly claim that permanent magnets cannot do work...."
... without energy being added. The device is question is therefore a fraud, a scam, a lie, a deception--- and you have been told why.
Desertphile 4 years ago
Ok Desertphile, lets take this to another level. You have consistently argued that energy is being added from outside the system. Fine, where would you like your cutoff reference to be? Your arm? The Food you ate? How far back do you want to go? I have clearly defined the parameters of my demonstrations and it is you that keeps trying deceive the viewers.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
there is not cuttoff... thats the point ... all of the energy in the universe has been here since the start in one form or another.
be it chemical , kinetic , potential ..etc
if there is any terminator to this infinite regress you can be damn sure its not a line of magnets.
memoryofakiss 4 years ago
This is why in open systems we always define the start and end. Time, Space & numbers are examples of open systems.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
yet you still assert that you are getting more work than the energy that was added to the system of magnets could account for...
memoryofakiss 4 years ago
In video 2 there are essentially 3 stages. In the primary stage we have an inital acceleration with a conservation of momentum. In the secondary stage we have increased acceleration due to stronger magnets (this is quickly neutralized by the incline). In the tertiary stage we see a very strong acceleration (where the target hits the plate) immediately followed by the pullback of the opposite dipole. The work from ...
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
... this tertiary accelertation is divided between the negative field cancellation and the kinetic transfer to the second target (which is then neutralized quickly by the incline i.e. gravity & friction).
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
The end run at rest values show target 1 with +GPe, -Mpe, 0Ke, 15"D and target 2 with 0+GPe, 0MPe, 0Ke, 0D. From this we can see that some of the -MPe is traded for altitude and distance. Since Work does not have energy in its equation we can see W=Fd applies and holds regardless of starting or ending potential or kinetic energy. Likewise, the work done to trigger the action is less then the work done during the action and is thus amplified.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
than
alysdexia 4 years ago
Thanx alysdexia, good proofreading :)
Should read "...triger the action is less THAN the work done..."
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
All energy must have a reference or it becomes meaningless.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Post Script: Just so you understand. Your test setup there would produce more energy out than in. But it wouldn't win the Nobel. This is because the energy out is traded for the negative field in the tertiary stage. To win the Nobel we have to apply it to a closed system which this is not.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
This is all wrong. Put the railing into a circle, drop a bearing anywhere in it, and your stupid, uneducated, willfully ignorant notions are demonstrated incorrect.
NotSoOldHippy 4 years ago
*Sigh* Another one who fails to watch BOTH of the videos all the through. Nothing I have indicated breaks any laws of physics nor is there any claim to energy 'creation' nor is there any claim to a closed system. Permanent Magnets Doing Work. Thats it.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"Permanent Magnets Doing Work. Thats it."
That work requires energy put into the system: you deny the fact that your arm put that energy into the system--- therefore NotSoOldHippy is correct and you are lying. By the way, you linked the videos to my video that debunked a "free energy" video that does claim to generate energy: you also claim that debunking is wrong. Why are you lying here?
Desertphile 4 years ago
You certainly are a master at double talk. In your video you say that permanent magnets can not produce work. I have demonstrated that they can.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"I have demonstrated that they can."
Nobody says or said magnetic fields cannot be used to produce work.
Desertphile 4 years ago
You do in the video I responded to. Now whos doing damage control. ;-)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"Permanent Magnets Doing Work"
Which, as you have been shown, is a mistaken notion.
NotSoOldHippy 4 years ago
I'll give you time to watch the videos and think about your comment which is incorrect.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
You are incorrect.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Nice experiment. However, you obviously lack the theoretical background to interpret the observations made in that experiment correctly. Desertphile explained correctly what really happens in his reply video. Generally it's a good idea to perform your own experiments if you want to learn something about physics, but you need at least a little bit of theoretical knowledge to interpret your observations. Maybe reading a book or two might help
AlexGerau 4 years ago 2
There are two videos. And no, I don't lack the theoretical background. Nor do I have any need to qualify my experience. Desertphile is very mistaken in his answer. And by the way...his hook is stainless, thats why it doesn't rust. But the carbon is not organized quite the same so it is magnetic stainless.
Cheers,
Harvey
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Sory Harvey, but you are mistaken. As I said you don't have to believe me. Nor DP. Just read a bleedin' physiks book.
AlexGerau 4 years ago 2
Once again, everything I state in the video is supported by physics. If you don't understand then say so. If you do understand it then we agree. I would be happy to explain it to you if necessary. W=Fd Work = Force times distance. Magnetic Force * distance of track = work performed. Whether or not more work is needed in setup or reset is not in question here.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"...everything I state in the video is supported by physics."
No. All of physics, both the laws and the theory and all of physicists, state you are wrong. You have already been told why: you just lack the courage to admit it.
Desertphile 4 years ago
You are so high on your pride ladder, I can see you tottering.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"You are so high on your pride ladder, I can see you tottering."
Golly, you forgot to answer the charges. I take that as an admission of your foolishness. Thank you for the admission but it was not necessary.
Desertphile 4 years ago
*charges* Hmmm, positive, negative, neutral, electric, magnetic, spatial, legal?
The problem here is that Desertphile jumped to a conclusion that contradicts the demonstrators stipulations. And now he is trying to cover his tracks.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"*charges* Hmmm, positive, negative, neutral, electric, magnetic, spatial, legal?"
If you take money from gullible rubes, it's a charge of immorality. If you're just an ignorant spewer of occult superstition, the charge is merely one of sadly being human.
NotSoOldHippy 4 years ago
I agree. So then, DP was refering to moral charges?
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Amen,
The reason i follow peoples results in these videos is to see the possible manipulations possible with magnets. Sure you cannot rule out the entire process to give you overunity or anything as such, but the test do show some ways to use magnets that could prove to be useful. *ahem* in an enviroment were work is present.
BrockTee 4 years ago
"the test do show some ways to use magnets that could prove to be useful. *ahem* in an enviroment were work is present."
Nobody said they were useless. Generators would not work without them.
AlexGerau 4 years ago
you appear to be quite ignorant when it comes to the fields of science you are talking about and/or the scientific method.
the theories already entirely cover all of reality that you have available in your garage. if you want to discover something new, build a relativistic particle acellerator that can compete with the LHC. or something like that.
kurtilein3 4 years ago 5
Oh now see, you jumped to a conclusion. Shame on you. And, you didn't see the scientific data provided in the link. Can you please get me a signed affidavit of a scientist explaining what a magnetic field or even flux for that matter really is?...*crickets* I thought so - they are still trying to learn what He already knows.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Take a class or a textbook; magnetism is /not/ a mystery, you hicktarded cretin. There is no He.
Learn these terms: magnet, electret, potential, equipotential, current, Coriolis effect, oscillation, harmònic oscillator, damped oscillator, net work, mekanic (mechanical) energy, state function, pendulum, spring
alysdexia 4 years ago
Your nomenclature is offensive. And this post will eventually be deleted. However magnetism is not fully understood. Electron spin is assumed to be the cause. But in reality this could be an effect instead. Not all negatively charged particles have a magnetic field. I have studied all of the terms listed from 1972 onward.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"you appear to be quite ignorant when it comes to the fields of science you are talking about and/or the scientific method. "
You seem to be quite ignorant when it comes to the definition of science.
Why do you care if someone tests an idea that you believe to be impossible?
Why should be dissuaded from testimg and recording there observations?
What is wrong with testing something most people call fact?
You my friend are very unscientific.
BrockTee 4 years ago
the problem is that he will fake the results.
and faking results and making things up and using mythology is NOT science.
kurtilein3 4 years ago
You can repeat my demonstration and see there is nothing faked, no laws broken and Permanent Magnets are doing the work as shown.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"... and Permanent Magnets are doing the work as shown."
You have already been told the magnets are doing work with energy *YOU* imparted to the system. The magnets themselves do not add any energy.
Desertphile 4 years ago
Yes they do. Thats why the ball rolls a greater distance and even uphill. It's called work (your defintion). There is an applied force for a given distance and the force is not from my arm. It is magnetic force. Period.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"...and the force is not from my arm."
Nobody said it was: I said the energy added to the system came from your arm, barring heat. F=ma, where a=potential energy (kinetic) imparted by your hand.
You attempt to do damage control is amusing.
Desertphile 4 years ago
Again I find myself educating you. 'a' is acceleration in the equation F=ma. Try again.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"Thats why the ball rolls a greater distance and even uphill."
The balls rolled up-hill because you imparted 100% of the energy for them to do so. Nobody said force came from your arm: everyone told you the ENERGY came from your arm. Magnetic force cannot produce energy: it only converts energy. You have confused force with energy.
Desertphile 4 years ago
Your words are becoming less and less meaningful. The acceleration comes from the magnetic force acting upon the mass of the ball. Nothing else. You have been debunked on this matter in every post I provided. Your opinion on the matter does not change the truth. Nor does your belief. I don't ask you to change your belief because that is up to you. I just present the evidence and the truth speak for itself.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Engine Room, Mr. Scott:
Ye canna change the laws of physics, laws of physics, laws of physics;
ye canna change the laws of physics, laws of physics, Jim.
mattblackcat 4 years ago
Lol.
I don't care how you do it, I need that warp drive ready in 10 minutes!
One thumbs up :)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"The acceleration comes from the magnetic force acting upon the mass of the ball."
Which is why you had to place the bearing within a pole of one of the magnets. --smile-- You have no idea what you're talking about and it's likely that your willful ignorance is occultism predicated.
No offense intended.
NotSoOldHippy 4 years ago
Well at least you agree that acceleration occurs as a result of the field. Trying to get your brother to understand that has been a struggle.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
No offense taken. :) However, you have quite blindly overlooked the magnetic force accelerating the ball over a distance. According to newtonian physics this is work.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"and Permanent Magnets are doing the work as shown"
No. Put the rail into a circle and you will note that your finger does the work. Desertphile explained the simple science behind why your notions are mistaken. I believe that your occult superstitions are keepoing you from accepting the observed laws of science.
No offense intended.
NotSoOldHippy 4 years ago
Each increase in accleration is given at the cost of reduced magnetic potential. This is clearly stipulated to at then end of video 2. However, if the final dipole was neutralized, wouldn't you agree that momentum could be conserved?
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Quite to the contrary. By putting the rail in a circle we learn that not only does the finger not perform the work but the opposite pole of the magnet performs addtional work in decelerating the ball. (This is why closed system do not function with dipoles)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Let stupid people be stupid. If someone believes something that is false or against your ideas. There is no shame in making your point. Which the person(s) may listen too, or may not.
However simply pointing and saying you are wrong or displaying a simple demonstration will not hinder these people from trying to make progress.
I like it becuase it causes people to use scientific method and maybe they will find some good stuff... just prolly not what they were lookin for
BrockTee 4 years ago
"Let stupid people be stupid."
The problem is that these stupid people don't all believe their own claims: they just make their bullshit claims to deceive people into buying their worthless devices, blueprints, magnets, etc. I saw one ass had placed such a device on EBay and the buyer has refused to pay for it, having watched my video after bidding on it. Ask me for details if interested.
Desertphile 4 years ago
If someone is trying to sell BS. I'm all for people saying hey this guy is selling a load of sh1t.
I tend to believe though that people would not think they can make money off of free energy.. hence the term free.
Obviously anyone trying to make money off it is full of it.
Sure if the guy is trying to sell a contraption that does not do or live up to its use by all means continue. If it's funtime playing science let them play.
BrockTee 4 years ago
So, apart from your use of vulgarity there are some redeeming qualities in you. You are the protector of the gullable. For that I commend you. However, your errors stand.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"What is wrong with testing something most people call fact?"
You clowns insist on claiming the world isn't as humanity knows it to be. It is like you and your "free energy" cultists claiming 2+2 does not always equal 4. The video shows the clown who make it doesn't understand WTF he's doing.
Desertphile 4 years ago
But besides annoying your existance what are these people gonna do to effect overall science belief? Yes some people would seemingly need guidance but heck why try and take away the world art of natural selection.
If we are doomed to take steps backwards for the inability of people to look over the facts and make up there own minds... well then the step must be taken.
live and let die
BrockTee 4 years ago
"you appear to be quite ignorant when it comes to the fields of science you are talking about and/or the scientific method."
That is the case with most of these "free energy" cult believers. They reject basic physics and insist the world's entire community of physicists are wrong.... yet they cannot show, or explain, why or how.
Desertphile 4 years ago
The best is yet to come. You need to get as high on your soap box as you can before He humbles you.
:)
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
"You need to get as high on your soap box as you can before He humbles you."
Who is "he?"
I viewed this video and I am astonished you do not see, or merely claim you do not see, where the energy is coming from. I kind of wonder if you are pretending to believe it comes from the magnetics: you video shows it does not. I have made a reply video.
Desertphile 4 years ago 4
Nobody claims magnets cannot produce work. The issue is that some people, such as yourself, have claimed magnets can produce work due to their own magnetic fields, without energy being added--- they cannot.
Desertphile 4 years ago 4