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

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

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by Solar » Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:14 am

There is more to this longstanding saga. Thanks to the fine work from one of my favorite experimentalist websites Conspiracy of Light here is a graphic that seeks to simplify the relationships being considered

Maranov Experiment

Two more unipolar videos:

Faraday paradox unipolar dynamo demo Part1

Faraday Paradox Unipolar Dynamo Part 2: The Solution

The video above references the dilemma of whether or not “magnetic flux lines” are being “cut” and whether the problem can be resolved using “closed circuits”. It was E. H. Kennard who developed an “open circuit” approach to disprove the “cutting of flux lines”. Kennard replaced the rotating disc with a rotating capacitor. The thing of note here is that even today when materials experience some form of ‘charging’ the word “anomalous” and/or “spontaneous” are used when the activity falls outside of theoretical expectations and/or when the cause is unknown.

Here are two of E. H. Kennard’s articles written five years apart (1912 & 1917) as referenced in the above video. In the conclusion of the first paper Kennard’s use of the phrase “ultra-relativist” is quite humorous:
Experimentally the question can be answered only by observation upon open circuits.

(…)

Analysis in terms of electrons seems to make necessary the existence of a stationary ether in order to explain the observed effect; so that the phenomenon seems to present difficulties for those relativist who reject the ether.

- On unipolar induction: Another experiment and its significance as evidence for the existence of the aether: E. H. Kennard - pg 179-190: The London, Edinburgh and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science -1917
That is, a, rotating magnet does not " carry its force lines " around with it.

It is thus rendered probable that electromagnetic induction caused by motion depends on absolute motion—that is, on motion relative to the aether, not on motion relative to material bodies.

- XCIII E. H. Kennard on Unipolar Induction pg 937: The London, Edinburgh and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science: 1912
Even today its possible to Goggle something like "Spontaneous Vacuum Charging" to underscore the idea that an interactive energetic "Something" is present in the Cosmos. It is up to the reader to determine the nature of this "open system" - "closed system" relationship. I usually look at that in terms of there being a Simultaneity - meaning - sure, its throughly possible to establish working apparatus using the idealized "closed system" approach. However, 'environmental energy' will seep into the mix taking the form of "transients" that must be stabilized. Obviously E. H. Kennard interpreted unipolar induction as evidence of rotation with respect to The Aether as exerting an 'environmental influence' spontaneously charging the capacitor in contrast to "those ultra-relativist who would abandon the conception of an aether altogether."
Last edited by Solar on Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
"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

Webbman
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by Webbman » Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:18 am

makes sense to me since magnetism is just aligned aether strands.
its all lies.

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

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Wed Dec 11, 2019 1:34 pm

Solar wrote:There is more to this longstanding saga. Thanks to the fine work from one of my favorite experimentalist websites Conspiracy of Light here is a graphic that seeks to simplify the relationships being considered

Maranov Experiment

Two more unipolar videos:

Faraday paradox unipolar dynamo demo Part1

Faraday Paradox Unipolar Dynamo Part 2: The Solution

The video above references the dilemma of whether or not “magnetic flux lines” are being “cut” and whether the problem can be resolved using “closed circuits”. It was E. H. Kennard who developed an “open circuit” approach to disprove the “cutting of flux lines”. Kennard replaced the rotating disc with a rotating capacitor. The thing of note here is that even today when materials experience some form of ‘charging’ the word “anomalous” and/or “spontaneous” are used when the activity falls outside of theoretical expectations and/or when the cause is unknown.

Here are two of E. H. Kennard’s articles written five years apart (1912 & 1917) as referenced in the above video. In the conclusion of the first paper Kennard’s use of the phrase “ultra-relativist” is quite humorous:
Experimentally the question can be answered only by observation upon open circuits.

(…)

Analysis in terms of electrons seems to make necessary the existence of a stationary ether in order to explain the observed effect; so that the phenomenon seems to present difficulties for those relativist who reject the ether.

- On unipolar induction: Another experiment and its significance as evidence for the existence of the aether: E. H. Kennard - pg 179-190: The London, Edinburgh and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science -1917
That is, a, rotating magnet does not " carry its force lines " around with it.

It is thus rendered probable that electromagnetic induction caused by motion depends on absolute motion—that is, on motion relative to the aether, not on motion relative to material bodies.

- XCIII E. H. Kennard on Unipolar Induction pg 937: The London, Edinburgh and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science: 1912
Even today its possible to Goggle something like "Spontaneous Vacuum Charging" to underscore the idea that an interactive energetic "Something" is present in the Cosmos. It is up to the reader to determine the nature of this "open system" - "closed system" relationship. I usually look at that in terms of there being a Simultaneity - meaning - sure, its throughly possible to establish working apparatus using the idealized "closed system" approach. However, 'environmental energy' will seep into the mix taking the form of "transients" that must be stabilized. Obviously E. H. Kennard interpreted unipolar induction as evidence of rotation with respect to The Aether as exerting an 'environmental influence' spontaneously charging the capacitor in contrast to "those ultra-relativist who would abandon the conception of an aether altogether."
Nice work. Yes a static field or static lines of force do of course favor an absolute reference frame, ie an aether. But one little problem is that this aether needs to be a static Lorentz kind of aether, whereas we all know today that what we hav is a free-range aether, a neoLorentz aether, an aether that moovs & flows, that has velocity & acceleration, that vary with place, & allso in any one place that vary with time. This complicates the issue a little.

The paradox becomes three paradoxes. The aetherwind at Earth blows at 500 kmps south to north approx. 20 deg off Earth's axis. This must affect the em field, & them there static lines of mmf. That's the real paradox.

That paradox can be sidestepped by postulating that the aberration of the em field affects the mmf of the flux together with the charge cmf field emitted by the electrons, hencely the 500 kmps mmf & the 500 kmps cmf don't clash.

But we know that the mmf & cmf clash due to the 1 mps rotation of the magnet (or disk)(or stator)(or meter wires if they spin). Hencely the real paradox stinks a bit differently to the simple skoolkid paradox. That's what keeps me awake nights.

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

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:03 pm

Solar wrote:
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)
I hav trouble following Tewari's explanations. I agree with him re that the key to free energy is an electron's perpetual motion charge spin magnetism etc. But i cant follow how his machine is somehow better than DePalma's. DePalma used permanent magnets (in his second version at least), while Tewari's machine has a solenoid electric magnet (or magnets). DePalma's & Tewari's machines are Faraday Disks, the fluxes are axial. In a Faraday Drum the flux is radial (i don't know whether anyone has built a serious drum machine). Tewari reckons that the reactions (back emf's ??) in Tewari's 2 rotors somehow cancel, making it more efficient. Do the 2 rotors rotate in opposite directions or what? Anyhow he reckons he has measured over 200% efficiency. I am waiting for someone to make a machine that is started by cranking by hand, & the machine then kicks into gear & goes faster & faster & explodes, destroying the voltmeter & the lab, in which case we can be more confident that it aint all bullshit.

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

Re: Faraday disc & DePalma.

Unread post by crawler » Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:02 pm

I hav been looking at free energy stuff. Some of it involves claims of overunity for electricity generation. But none of these that i hav seen in the past few days mention or involve a Faraday Disk effekt. They generate an emf one way or another, but they all ignore their Faraday Disk emf (that must exist). Why don't they hav additional wires tapping into their Faraday Disk emf, getting two emfs for the price of one. Or am i missing something.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests