In article
,
Benj wrote:

On Jul 29, 8:55*pm, Salmon Egg wrote:

The galvanometer does not deflect when only the magnet turns. The
galvanometer deflects if only the loop turns.

This is not correct. What you are describing is the "one-piece"
Faraday dynamo often referred to as an "N" machine. The "paradox" is
that if you build a Faraday generator with a fixed magnet and rotating
disk, it works. But if you now glue the magnets to the conductive disk
and rotate the magnets and disk together, you find that the generator
STILL WORKS. The rotating conductive magnet is just a variation on the
one-piece generator. If you rotate the wires and brushes and keep the
magnet fixed, the unit also produces the same output as if you rotated
the disk and magnet keeping the wire and brushes fixed. . Your
rotating conductive magnet is simply a variation on the one-piece
Faraday Generator.

Maybe I was not making myself clear. I is the turning of the loop that
matters. Whether the magnet rotates or not is irrelevant.

Bill

----------------------------
"Terry L Hewett Sr" wrote in message
...
I really don't understand why you guys don't understand that a voltage is
induced in this manner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXtG4Dkrp4c


We do understand what is going on here- That's why we don't accept your
nonsense. --

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer

----------------------------
"Terry L Hewett Sr" wrote in message
...

"Don Kelly" wrote in message
news:seckk.149625$gc5.72566@pd7urf2no...
----------------------------
"Terry L Hewett Sr" wrote in message
...
I really don't understand why you guys don't understand that a voltage is
induced in this manner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXtG4Dkrp4c


We do understand what is going on here- That's why we don't accept your
nonsense. --

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer



Apparently not. If what i present is "nonsense" than all that Faraday
contributed is also "nonsense"!? In fact it would be safe to say that
Faraday met the same initial resistance.
This is sixth grade science. it doesn't take above a childs understanding
really.
There are only three main principles at play here. Electromagnetic force,
Kinetic energy, and electromagnetic induction. Anything above that is a
byproduct of the unified transformations of energy.



Faraday is OK but in the common form is incomplete. Maxwell'version is
better but again is often given in an incomplete form. This factor is not
taught in 6th grade and apparently not at the university level except in an
some texts on electromagnetic machines (and in one graduate level text that
I have ).
The thing is that he had observed and repeatable data to draw his
conclusions from. You have only given fanciful descriptions with an ounce of
truth buried in a ton of conjecture.

Given this , you did put up a jpg which showed a ring- apparently what you
are now talking about. It consists of a torus with rings spaced around it.
a)what is the material in the torus? Does it include permanent magnets?
Spaced apart? If so , by what?
b)what are the rings- coils? Magnets? If the latter, are they toroidal with
the poles on the flat faces?

A few other questions and comments may follow but the major one is how do
you expect such a setup to produce forces to cause motion?




--

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 12:07:46 -0500 Terry L Hewett Sr wrote:

[snipped]

The only reliably unambiguous model of quoting other people's postings is
to indent what they posted, with a character and space added on the left
side (right side if in Hebrew or Arabic). Then put your words right after
each specific point you want to refer to. Also, don't quote any more than
is needed to identify the specific reference point. We can read the whole
previous post itself by switching to the previous post, so we don't need
(or want) to see the whole thing again.

Quoting with some row of characters so that rows alternate between what
you quoted and what you say becomes ambiguous, and hard to follow.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

"Don Kelly" wrote in message
news:esrkk.106691$kx.104692@pd7urf3no...
----------------------------
"Terry L Hewett Sr" wrote in message
...

"Don Kelly" wrote in message
news:seckk.149625$gc5.72566@pd7urf2no...
----------------------------
"Terry L Hewett Sr" wrote in message
...
I really don't understand why you guys don't understand that a voltage
is induced in this manner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXtG4Dkrp4c


We do understand what is going on here- That's why we don't accept your
nonsense. --

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer



Apparently not. If what i present is "nonsense" than all that Faraday
contributed is also "nonsense"!? In fact it would be safe to say that
Faraday met the same initial resistance.
This is sixth grade science. it doesn't take above a childs understanding
really.
There are only three main principles at play here. Electromagnetic force,
Kinetic energy, and electromagnetic induction. Anything above that is a
byproduct of the unified transformations of energy.



Faraday is OK but in the common form is incomplete. Maxwell'version is
better but again is often given in an incomplete form. This factor is not
taught in 6th grade and apparently not at the university level except in
an some texts on electromagnetic machines (and in one graduate level text
that I have ).
The thing is that he had observed and repeatable data to draw his
conclusions from. You have only given fanciful descriptions with an ounce
of truth buried in a ton of conjecture.

Given this , you did put up a jpg which showed a ring- apparently what you
are now talking about. It consists of a torus with rings spaced around it.
a)what is the material in the torus? Does it include permanent magnets?
Spaced apart? If so , by what?
b)what are the rings- coils? Magnets? If the latter, are they toroidal
with the poles on the flat faces?

A few other questions and comments may follow but the major one is how do
you expect such a setup to produce forces to cause motion?
--

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer


Conjecture? I'm applying some pretty well established principles in a manner
that is unique not only to mechanics but physics as well.
http://terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/prototypes,html

Faraday is the man and this mechanism completes his works. I wound a iron
core electromagnet and did the plunging a magnet into a coil experiment in
the sixth grade. I say it is childs play.

a. a crystaline structure such as obsidian i believe would be ideal. However
Rare Earth NdFeB in the form torus will suffice for now. Permanent
magnetic fields imposed upon the torus at various intervals. Yes
spaced apart. Impose permanent field move torus, impose permanent field
move torus, repeat process till the torus has a full compliment of fields at
equal intervals or rather spacing. Seporated by non permanently magnetized
NdFeB.

b. The "rings" are magnets. not toroidal. disc and yes polar on the
flat faces. opposite poles are attracting cosistantly throughout the
multipole loop arrangement which by all intensive pourposes is a looped
dipole arrangement.

Your major question. The attracting poles generate a flux field as they
are attracted to eachother. It has all the properties of any other flux
field.
it isn't permanent and can be easily manipulated by a stronger
electromagnetic field.
Superconductance comes into play in the reduction of this field. The
reduction is
of the permiating fields not the mass that plays host to the generated
flux field. The mass is impartial to this field providing it is not
conductive.

The drive coils 4 in this example
http://terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/i...incomplete.jpg
Cage 5 or more multiple permanent fields of the toroid armature each coil.
within the drive coils only the permanent fields will be allowed to prevail.
the drive coils poles will interract with the permanent fields as they
approach
travel through and depart from the drive coils. You cannot escape timing
when
a cyclic mechanism is involved. the coils are offset to promote a constant
attraction
and repulsion uniformly devided among the 4 drive coils. One of the coils
will be
neutral in reference to corrisponding permanent fields of the toroid
armature.
the other three coils will be in a progressive state of attraction and
repulsion
continuing fluid motion of the toroid armature.

All 4 drive coils support the toroid armatures permanent fields while in
operation.
I've come to understand the caging of the toroid armature as a hadshake or
agreement between electromagnetic field and the permanent fields emf caged
within.
The electromagnetic field by design is not strong enough to demagnetize the
permanent fields of the toroid armature. So both fields have to cope with
bieng
in close relation to eachother neither strong enough to overwhelm the other.
each of the permanent fields would rather flip and align with the drive
coils poles,
but is prevented from doing such by the permanent fields placement of each
segment
within the toroid armatures mass. The drive coils initial coping mechanism
is to
align it and attract it to the nearest opposite pole, if that is not an
option than the drive
coils next option is to repulse the offending multiple manifestations as far
away as it needs to
manipulate them (flip) and attract it to the nearest opposing pole.

By design entropy is barred. The drive coils have only one option exploit
the path of least resistance.
The toroid armatures permanent fields have the same option "exploit the path
of least resistance".

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:55:41 -0700 Salmon Egg wrote:

| If a magnet works because it has microscopic current loops generating
| the magnetic field, is it feasible to show change in the magnet's
| strength by spining it at high speed?

How about spinning a non-magnet metal (or even non-metal) that is highly charged?

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

"Terry L Hewett Sr" wrote in message
...
Conjecture? I'm applying some pretty well established principles in a
manner
that is unique not only to mechanics but physics as well.
http://terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/prototypes,html


the link is an error this is the intended link
http://terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/prototypes.html