Faraday disc & DePalma.

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:11 am

I am presently looking into whether flux lines rotate with a rotating magnet. They dont.
Re being spatially independent of the rotating magnet, yes they are, & no they aint.
They aint if a load is introduced in the nearfield. The load would be a say a resistance to an electric current induced in a circuit in the nearfield (my wording might be bad here).

I reckon that the magnetic field is due to photaenos. A load in the nearfield would feed back some kind of drag effect to the spinning magnet via the photaenos.

Re photaenos, they propagate forwards, ie straight ahead (like photons)(not sideways) throo the aether.
But if the spinning magnet is mooving along throo the aether then the photaeno field might be in effect attached to the magnet somewhere for an instant (but this is unlikely)(the spin would need to be at 500 kmps).

Here is some wordage from the article in the link............

Although Faraday never adduced an experiment to prove the cutting of flux linkages in the axially rotating magnet experiment, he was troubled to his last days about his interpretation of his experiment. It took until 1978 when DePalma, reference (1), did the critical experiment to determine if the form of electrical induction was the same as the flux cutting originally proposed by Faraday. The problem has been re-stated by other workers who would attempt to determine whether flux lines rotate with, or are spatially independent of the axially rotating magnet. To date, no experiment has been found either to confirm or disprove the axially rotating flux line hypothesis, reference (2).
https://depalma.pairsite.com/Absurdity/ ... Wrong.html

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:12 pm

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/f ... 664/page-2
I came across this variation of the Faraday Paradox.
Carrz asks whether a non-rotating Faraday disc (& magnet) would produce an emf if on a mooving train.
The answer is of course yes.

I hav a variation on the above.
What if the train is stationary?
The answer is again yes there would be an emf.

It might be difficult to measure the emf in both cases, the emf wont necessarily be tween axle & rim, but there will be an emf in one direction somewhere on the disc (& one direction of course means two directions).

The explanation is that the magnetic flux is allways stationary in the aether (ie flux cant go sideways)(but can propagate straight ahead at say c kmps)(or more likely say 5c kmps). And there is allways an aetherwind blowing throo the train & disc & magnet (the background aetherwind near Earth is approx. 500 kmps).

So why don't we see an emf due to that there 500 kmps?
I reckon that we will see an emf on a train mooving at say 0.01 kmps, which is actually mooving at say 500.01 kmps.
So why not when mooving at 500.00 kmps?
I think that the answer might hav something to do with the voltmeter mooving at 500.00 kmps.
Still thinking.

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by Solar » Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:30 am

Here are some very nice videos of this experiment. Having used several types of meters the synopsis at the end of Exx-013 is interesting. Consider that when a meter is placed into a circuit; the meter itself, probe tips and all, becomes a part of that circuit.

Exx-003 Faraday Disk Anomaly - Homopolar Generator - Faraday Paradox

Exx-004 Tesla's Homopolar Generator - The Dynamo-Electric Machine

Exx-013 Faraday Disk Paradox & Anomaly - Solved! - Part 1/6 of the Faraday Solution

Exx-014 Tesla's Homopolar Generator 2 - Mystery Solved! - Part 2/6 of the Faraday Solution

Here is link to the all of the vids on that channel: Science Exxience Videos
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:37 pm

Thanx for that. Very interesting.
I see that their theory is wrong. They appear to believe that the magnetic field rotates, which it doesnt, flux cant go sideways. If it did rotate then in at least one possible scenario the field at a large radius would be moving sideways at more than c kmps.

No, the answer is that there is a radial inwards or outwards force on every electron in the spinning disc (& magnet). This creates a say buildup of electrons in the rim & a say shortage of electrons in the axle (or vice versa).
Electrons repel each other in the rim (because there are "too many" at the rim) & electrons are attracted to the axle (koz there aint enuff at the axle), thusly there is a balancing act along a radius. The gradient of the emf due to the tangential velocity is a max at the rim & nearnuff zero at center. Hencely there is nearnuff zero charge at center, & lots of negative charge at the rim.

I reckon that there must be a steady migration of electrons radially outwards along the surface & radially inwards inside the copper (& magnets). Thusly the thickness of the copper might hav an effect.

When Tesla connects the rims of his two discs electrons from one disc migrate to the other disc making one disc very negative & the other very positive. This strong charge-effect overcame the otherwise weak emf-effect at the axles.

Voltmeters etc all affect their own readings-measurements all the time, however here the effect is minimal because the wires etc are stationary in a stationary field.

The only case that i remember where a wire might affect a measurement etc is the case where LEDs were installed tween the axles of the two discs & a wire was fixed from the LEDs to the rim of each disc. These two wires rotated with the discs & hencely the wires cut the fields, & this might hav had an emf effect (but i havent thort this throo).

They reckon that Tesla's chain (driving his second disc) was the source of his emf, but that is baloney.

These two effects explain everything (i think)(i might hav to hav another look at the footage).
One effect is the continual steady radial sloshing around of electrons within a disc (outwards along the surface & inwards inside)(or vice versa).
The other effect is the sloshing of electrons from one disc to the other (early on)(just the once).

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:10 pm

Just remembered, they ended with an X in which one disc cogged with the other, ie their two discs turning in opposite directions, with NS magnets reversed, & get zero emf tween rim one & rim two, & they ask for an explanation. Hell, that is Fraday Disc 101. Of course there iz zero emf-effect, rim to rim, the emfs are in the same direction, eg axle to rim, thusly the emfs cancel. And also there is no sloshing of charge from one to tother, thusly zero charge effect. But nice work re the apparatus & footage, just a pity that their theory gets an F.

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:13 pm

And i don't see the need for any copper, i reckon that the magnets should do the trick on their own.

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:10 am


crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:36 pm

I had another look at the aforementioned 2:16:10 youtube footage of DePalma & his N machine.
[4:26] Bruce started thinking about this stuff in 1970. [7:40] He reckons that a spinning object creates an inertial field. [12:05] A 1" ball bearing rises higher & falls quicker when spinning about a vertical axis (stroboscope pix). [14:30] A gyro spinning in a box weighs 0.38 oz more than when not spinning. [18:00] A gyro spinning in a box affects a similar box nearbye. [20:20] When boxes collide energy is not conserved (my comment, so what, it never is). [22:50] Drawing of Accutron watch (360 cps tuning fork mounted horizontally) mounted on face of an electric clock sitting over the axle of a spinning wheel, watch looses 0.9 sec in 17 minutes. [25:29] He calls the inertial field an OD field. [22:54] Accutron manual says that vertical forks loose or gain 4.5 sec in a day compared to horizontal. [27:20] Grass grows at a different angle in an inertial field. [28:40] Inertial field affects radio frequency. [31:04] Drawing of anti gravity machine. [32:40] N machine. [33:45] Faraday's notes. [34:35] Mentions ether i think. Sea of energy. [36:50] Sunburst homopolar generator. [37:30] Flying saucers. [38:00] N machine. 1600 amp at 1 volt. 20 to 1 power ratio. [39:38] Machine tested by Dr Robert Klincholme (??) of Stanford Uni, 21 June 1984 or 86, reported to Society for Scientific Exploration. [40:00] Machine gave 7.6 to 1 power ratio. Or 4 to 1 if including solenoid drag. Dr K discovered that a spinning solenoid when turned on has drag due to rotation of the magnet. Cause not known. Energy comes from somewhere, Bruce reckons from space. [40:58] Trombley's improoved rotor with induced flux inside. German team working on machine. [42:10] We dont understand rotating discs. [42:40] 1979 self running engine (Faraday discs with static magnets on same axle as an N machine with rotating magnets) producing mechanical & electrical power. [43:53] He used 1" ferrite magnets. [44:35] He used mercury contacts. [45:50] N machine. 0.1 volts 6000 amps. [47:05] DePalma's equivalence engine. Too complicated to talk about he says. [49:08] Neodynium hexagons glued together to make disc weighing 200 pounds. [50:00] A spiral cut into the copper disc reduces the resistance & increases the magnetic field & output. Discovered by Tesla in 1891. [51:05] A beryllium copper shaft gives strength & conductivity. 51:04] Copper busbars contain the mercury. [52:00] The copper disc protrudes a little to help give a zero field at the mercury. [52:40] Completed N machine. Box is filled with helium . Air corrodes mercury. [53:25] Load absorbs 100 kW at 12 volts. [53:40] Graph of input & output. Losses are revs to the power 1.5 whilst gains are to the power 2. [56:20] Bruce went to Europe for 3 months, mainly Germany (they made several machines)(they use copper plated parts, & ferrite ring magnets). [57:28] Data from German machine No2 (4 kW output)(No3 will be 30 kW). [1:00:25] Tewari made a machine in India. [1:03;27] We dont understand Tesla's work because we dont understand AC current & precession at the atomic level. [1:03:40] End of presentation.

Start of questions. [1:04:00] Bruce talks of reducing back emf. N machine cost $500,000. [1:08:00] The whole universe contributes to inertia (Maxwell Einstein). Reich spoke of possible free energy in the oldendays. [1:09:00] Bruce mentions losses due to hysteresis of aether. There is some kind of intrinsic drag. There is a machine in France. [1:18:47] End of questions.

Start of footage of team building the N machine. They run it at 2600 rpm but cant reach 7000 rpm due to vibration etc. They need to top up lost mercury. The copper disc has two Tesla spirals (from 1891). [2:09:00] End.

Start of Bruce's talk on radio. [2:16:10] End.

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:28 pm


User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by Solar » Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:38 pm

Maybe I misunderstand this N Machine; but something doesn't seem right. What happens when a magnet meets copper?

Copper's Surprising Reaction to Strong Magnets

Lenz's Law with Copper Pipe

The N-Machine sandwiches a copper disc between insanely powerful magnets. This would induce some pretty intense circulating Eddy Currents parallel to the copper disc in order to oppose the magnetic fields incident on said copper disc by all of those magnets. The entire sandwiched copper disc assembly impresses as being an assembly from which to draw Eddy Currents from the edges of the spinning copper disc.

Is the drive motor that spins the copper disc and magnets assembly also being fed by the Eddy Currents?
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:05 pm

Solar wrote:
Maybe I misunderstand this N Machine; but something doesn't seem right. What happens when a magnet meets copper?

Copper's Surprising Reaction to Strong Magnets
Lenz's Law with Copper Pipe

The N-Machine sandwiches a copper disc between insanely powerful magnets. This would induce some pretty intense circulating Eddy Currents parallel to the copper disc in order to oppose the magnetic fields incident on said copper disc by all of those magnets. The entire sandwiched copper disc assembly impresses as being an assembly from which to draw Eddy Currents from the edges of the spinning copper disc.

Is the drive motor that spins the copper disc and magnets assembly also being fed by the Eddy Currents?
I think that there is no eddy current problem if the magnets cover the whole copper disc, ie if the flux passing throo the disc is uniform.

However Tesla in a link below describes eddy current problems for a disc near 2 small magnets, ie an oldenday's kind of apparatus.

I doubt that there are any eddy currents along the edge of a copper disc (with large magnets covering allmost all of the disc), even if the edge is sticking out a little clear of the magnets. Here the flux must change measured along a diameter, but that there flux duznt change with time, ie it is non-uniform along a diameter, but is uniform around a radius (u know what i mean).

There must be eddy currents around the rim of a copper disc, due to electrons mooving towards the bush (which is touching the rim), especially near the bush, especially if there is only one bush.

DePalma's N machine had copper bushes (bars) that went allmost all the way around the rims, or at least the mercury in the grooves in the bars acted as the bushes, but i don't know if that mercury contact went all the way around or whether it went say halfway around, in any case that arrangement would hav minimized any such eddy currents.

https://teslaresearch.jimdo.com/article ... pt-2-1891/
http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/doc/teslaspatente.pdf
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesl ... sla_25.htm
https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0012/0012009.pdf

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Fri Dec 06, 2019 2:22 pm

I found Kincheloe's report re DePalma's N machine. I think this refers to the early phase one version, not the later phase two version. Plus bruce made a few other versions later. Kincheloe said that conventional theory could not explain the power output.
http://rexresearch.com/kinchelo/kinche.htm

Conclusions
We are therefore faced with the apparent result that the output power obtained when the generator magnet is energized greatly exceeds the increase in drive power over that needed to supply losses with the magnet not energized. This is certainly anomalous in terms of convential theory. Possible explanations?
1. There could be a large error in the measurements resulting from some factor such as noise which caused the digital meters to read incorrectly or grossly inaccurate current shunt resistances.
If the measured results had shown that the computed generated output power exceeded the input drive power by only a few percent this explanation would be reasonable and would suggest that more careful calibration and measurements might show that the results described above were due to measurement error.
With the data showing such a large ratio of generated power to input power increase, however, in my opinion this explanation of the results seems unlikely.
(A later test showed that the digital meters are insensitive to a large AC ripple superimposed on the measured DC, but within their rated accuracy of 0.1% give a true average value).

2. There could be a large difference between the measured voltage at the metering brushes and the actual generated voltage in the output brush circuit due to armature reaction, differences in the external metering and output circuit geometry, or other unexplained causes.
As discussed above the various data do not seem to support this possibility.

3. DePalma may have been right in that there is indeed a situation here whereby energy is being obtained from a previously unknown and unexplained source.

This is a conclusion that most scientists and engineers would reject out of hand as being a violation of accepted laws of physics, and if true has incredible implications.

4. Perhaps other possibilities will occur to the reader.

The data obtained so far seems to have shown that while DePalma's numbers were high, his basic premise has not been disproved. While the Sunburst generator does not produce useful output power because of the internal losses inherent in the design, a number of techniques could be used to reduce the friction losses, increase the total generated voltage and the fraction of generated power delivered to an external load. DePalma's claim of free energy generation could perhaps then be examined.

I should mention, however, that the obvious application of using the output of a "free-energy" generator to provide its own motive power, and thus truly produce a source of free energy, has occurred to a number of people and several such machines have been built. At least one of these known to me [13], using what seemed to be a good design techniques, was unsuccessful.

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Fri Dec 06, 2019 2:47 pm

I reckon that there is some kind of harvesting of free energy going on in an N machine. This might not be in accord with conventional energy conservation laws, & it might require perpetual motion (another no no). But i reckon that we hav at least 4 cases of perpetual motion that we see every day.

(1) Photons are perpetual (they propagate for ever).
(2) Electron spin is perpetual motion.
(3) Electron charge is perpetual.
(4) Electron orbit is perpetual motion.

An N machine harvests energy from the sub-quantum world & brings it into our quantum world.
The sub-quantum world consists of praether (the fundamental essence) & aether (a process of the praether).
The quantum world consists of elementary particles, ie electrons quarks etc.
Photons (& photaenos) are in effect in a third world, that joins the 2 main worlds (they are quasi-elementary particles)(they hav quasi-mass). Photaenos give us charge & magnetism etc.

But Bruce DePalma reckoned that his free energy or zero point energy came from space. I think i heard him mention aether just the one time. Bruce i think reckoned that the key was ........

(5) The precession of the spin of electrons.

Bruce reckoned that the N machine tapped into precession. Either he reckoned that magnetism involved precession, or praps that precession affected an electron's movement (eg emf) in some other way.

For sure he reckoned that spin affected inertial mass, due once again to the precession of the spin of electrons, but i don't think that he thort that loss of inertia etc had anything to do with making his N machine tick.

Bruce in his final year lived in Australia & New Zealand. I think he might hav died of Aids, he is buried in NZ.

crawler
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Fri Dec 06, 2019 3:07 pm

My cousin's house uses solar panels & gel batteries with a diesel backup.

We will know that N machines hav arrived when we can go to our shed & start our N machine by cranking by hand, & then step back & watch the N machine kick into gear & make our lights shine brightly.

THE HOMOPOLAR HANDBOOK by Thomas Valone 1994 1998 2001.
A definitive guide to Faraday Disk & N-Machine technologies.
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=8c ... ma&f=false

It appears that a lack of backtorque is needed for overunity.
An N machine has some backtorque. Where does it come from?
I think that magnetism has mass (ie photaenos hav mass).
Do magnetic flux field lines or lines of force move sideways? Do field lines & lines of force hav a separate existence to the field itself.
Still thinking.

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by Solar » Tue Dec 10, 2019 7:00 pm

crawler wrote: It appears that a lack of backtorque is needed for overunity.
An N machine has some backtorque. Where does it come from?
Paramahamsa Tewari apparently modified Mr. DePalma’s N-Machine to eliminate the “back torque” and instead induce a force that "supports the motor torque":

Aus Dem Nichts RLG Test & Space Vortex Theory copy

-Starting at 0:30 - “The energy source is the electrostatic field of the Atom and the electrostatic field of the electron. They interact, without loss of their structural power.”

-Starting at 6:00 - “Atom; which attracts this electron, again leaves it - attracts it - leaves it, electrostatic-ally. So that is also doing work. Both are doing work. That work that they are doing is coming at extra power. But their structure remains the same. Because they are not of ordinary so called matter; but they are of non-matter - Massless Aether. Therefore, Aether has got to be once again established. Then there will be meaningful understanding of physics, meaningful understanding of Metaphysics, and meaningful understanding of Spiritual Processes."

See also:
Though the atoms of the circuit conductor do work in pulling the electrons from the negative terminal and up to the positive terminal, their structural energy remains intact without any loss. This is because the electrons as well as the atoms are vortices of a mass less, continuous, non viscous, vacuum. The vortices continue to retain their structure despite their continuing interactions.

In a RLG, by a specific configuration of the armature conductor and the magnetic field, a torque that supports the motor torque is created. This way the armature reaction is nullified and Lenz's law is bypassed. There is no creation of energy from any source. There is no applicability of the Law of Conservation of Energy. - India: Tewari's Reaction Less Generator Shows Promise
If the theory is correct that would make it an "Open System".

Paramahamsa Tewari developed Space Vortex Theory (SVT)
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest