>Well one interesting thought is if we have a magnet, and there is nothing else >magnetic, then no energy can be tapped from it, but it still cost the same to >establish the field.
We could move a coil of wire through the field of the lonely magnetic. I suppose that if we had to move the coil with force then we would supply the energy released into a load, but if by chance the magnet was moving relative to our coil, then that relative motion might supply the energy as the magnet lost kinetic energy. This is the description of a generator of sorts. >Additionally it we let iron particle cover our magnet until there is no >observable outside field (still there really, but cancelled), you could >conclude that it has not expanded it's energy, but if you turned the magnet >off (heating it, or it may have been an electromagnet) you will still get a >strong jolt of energy (inductive) can the field collapses, and more than if >the iron particles were not there! Anything that changes the flux coupling to a coil will generate an EMF. I suspect that an electromagnetic behaves a bit differently than a permanent one, but this would still be true. >Interestingly if this were an electromagnet all along, each particle of iron >that attached it's self would have taken a bite out of the current in the >electromagnet (an EMF opposing the current). It seems reasonable to assume that the energy given to each piece of steel or iron would have to come from the DC source as you suggest. I believe that the overall field would also likely increase in the case of an electromagnetic. >So if we have a magnet that is attracting some iron, this same thing must be >taking place! I believe the external field becomes less with a permanent magnet with additional iron attachment. The opposite happens with an electromagnet. >For those of insufficient understanding of electricity, consider plugging in >an unloaded transformer. The resistance of the wire is low, and it would act as a near short except the iron causes such a high impedance that any growth of the field causes an EMF that opposes the change in the field/current. The same EMF occurs with permanent magnets, so when the field is increasing the atoms involved in producing the magnetic field must find energy taken from them. So where does this energy come from? Since we can't endlessly raise a field, what occurs if we make the rise time (where energy is taken from the atoms) and the fall time (given back) very different, with non linear curves and significant differences in the rise and fall times, it might just be possible to break such a system away from unity. If so, what would occur? The iron atoms would become very excited with extra energy, or drained in the converse setup. Now it occurs to me that here are a ton of accounts of invisibility occurring with experiments and almost every one involves steel and changing magnetic fields (and I would come to that conclusion even without considering the Philadelphia experiment). So what if one way you get free energy, and the other way you get invisibility. Quite good I guess, since it would be a real pain to lose your Free Energy device :) >F*%#, that's the 3rd one I've lost this week! ***Keep asking those good questions! John On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:08 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: I always find this subject interesting to discuss. One could consider every piece of iron in the universe to posses potential energy in relation to a powerful magnet. Any of these iron things could be brought closer to our magnet and it would find itself subject to a force that could impart energy onto it. If the metal item were not held back by some other means such as the scale that I have spoken of, then it would accelerate toward the magnet and gain kinetic energy until it collided and releases it in the form of heat or some other energy. This process can continue for a while until just the right amount of iron was attached to the magnet. This energy had to come from somewhere and I assume that it is from the original field. Now the question arises as to what would happen if the iron is now reversed and removed from the magnet. I assume that any energy that was extracted in the form of mechanical work would be returned by applying the same amount in reverse. The same should not be true for heat that escaped from the system as kinetic energy was converted into heat due to a collision unless we supply a mechanical input that replaces that heat energy. I guess that should be possible and if so, the magnet acts as a transformer that converts some of the mechanical energy into heat. The bottom line is that a permanent magnet contains energy due to the field surrounding and within it. This energy can be extracted with the proper technique leaving some minimum energy that is beyond our reach due to geometry. A second process can be used to regenerate the original energy field by returning what was borrowed. The important questions that we need answered are how much actual energy is stored in the original magnet and how much can we borrow? Who wants to tackle these questions? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Alan Fletcher <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, Apr 14, 2013 7:25 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Yildiz motor in Geneva -- ran 5.5 hours then broke down > From: "David Roberson" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 3:49:20 PM > > I am having a difficult time judging the amount of energy stored in > these magnets. I recall almost having a finger removed when holding > a piece of steel near a powerful rare earth magnet. The force > attracting the metal was very large and worked against my muscle > power. I do not know how many joules of energy were released by the > magnet as it drew the steel near to itself, but it was significant. > I assume this process could be repeated many times with additional > pieces of steel until the field was hidden within the metal mass. Force x distance = work. > If you take that amount of energy and multiply it by the number of > magnets in the device, you obtain a fairly large amount of energy. I > would certainly expect this amount of available energy to be capable > of overcoming the losses due to friction in bearings for a very long > time. The energy extracted by a fan would need to be handled as > well. I am not suggesting that the Yildiz motor is a fraud, but I > suspect that there may be another explanation for its performance > that is more "down to earth". :-) That's just potential energy. When you pull the magnets apart you add it, when they return they deliver it. Nothing to do with what's stored IN the magnet. And even that isn't destroyed if you "demagnetize" the magnet -- you just get the domains pointing in different directions. I suppose degausing requires some sort of energy budget. Dave
