Russell, I'm agree ( but only partially ) with your remark about the physics law. But I have a question: Have you test just one of those things, claimed to be perpetuum mobile ? ( I believe I know already your answer ) Or you said all the time ( probably to your pupils also ) it's not possible ! Because even I must be agree there are well known physics laws, there are definitely another laws which have not been discovered yet ( I think we already talk on this subject ) So I prefer to test some things before to say, NO THIS IS NOT WORKING and would never works because are breaking the physics laws. Best regards, Vasile On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Russell McMahon wrote: > Not all patents actually work as claimed. > > In this case however, without going back over the thread in detail, it > sounds rather like a classic "homopolar generator". These appear to break > the laws of physics (Jim) - which of course they can't do, by definition. > Rotating a conductor in a constant magnetic field appears to not satisfy the > conditions for magnetic induction, Nobody told Tesla who seems to have > thought of them first, or homopolar generators themselves and they happily > go about their business. Searching for homopolar generator on the web should > turn up many examples. Be careful not to be taken in by the inevitable > mumbo-jumbo and rubbish that invariably accompanies anything that Tesla did. > His science was generally pretty good but that of many (not all) who attempt > to follow him is often pretty non-existent. > > > > Russell McMahon > _____________________________ > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vasile Surducan" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, 10 October 2001 18:33 > Subject: Re: [EE]: "no variance, no induced currents" (was: Effects of a > magnet on a PIC ?) > > > > Heh, I had exactly the same opinion before reading carefully the patent. > > It was a printed material, don't ask me if is on the site I've point, I > > think I've got it from http://patent.womplex.ibm.com a while ago. > > It's a REAL generator able to supply a load with large currents ( 10 to > > 300A ) at low voltage ( up to 3 V ) using mercury brushes. > > You can't get a few miliamperes just with two short wire which stays in a > > variable field, make a try to convince yourself ( the wire are > > perpendicular on the magnetic field ) > > I haven't now any batery powered datalogger, but I'll built one and test, > > however will be serious problems to centre the whole ansembly at 5000 > > rpm to avoid strokes. > > I have the feeling you wrong, else this guy can't patented his invention ( > > assuming that americans are seriously when they patented something; btw > > this guy was involved in gyroscope's building from USA army and now have > > his own research institute ) > > > > cheers, Vasile > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, M. Adam Davis wrote: > > > > > This is actually rather simple to explain. The wires (bushings) which > > > come off the copper surface /are/ moving relative to the magnetic field, > > > and that is what is creating the current. > > > > > > Perform this simple modification: > > > > > > Attach a datalogger to the spinning assembly so it rotates with the > > > board, and measures voltage and current while spinning. > > > > > > Result? No induce voltages, no induced currents, nada, nil, nothing > > > (excepting, of course, the aformentioned earth's magnetic field). > > > > > > Too many experimentors do not take into account the full system when > > > running their experiments, and often achieve 'over unity' only because > > > they do not take into account one or another energy source going into > > > the system. > > > > > > -Adam > > > > > > Vasile Surducan wrote: > > > > > > >On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Robert Rolf wrote: > > > > > > > >>If the field is NOT varying, the effect should be nil. > > > >>No variance, no induced currents. I don't think that the silicon > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >Robert, I propose you a simple experiment who, if will not change your > > > >ideeas, will made from you a deeply thinker (I'm partially agree with > > > >your explanation ) > > > > > > > >Take a circular magnet ( like those used in 20W...50W speakers ), you > > > >need a good one to have a strong magnetic field, but the experiment is > > > >working with any magnet). Solder the magnet using a good glue ( poxipol > or > > > >other bi-component resin ) to a single side layer PCB. > > > >The PCB may be a square one or better have a round surface one ( a 10 > cm > > > >diameter or more ) On the copper side do a circular insulation to > obtain > > > >an external copper ring and an internal copper surface inside a circle. > > > >Twirl THE WHOLE ENSEMBLY with 1500...5000 rpm, so the magnetic field on > > > >the copper surface WILL BE ALWAYS CONSTANT except a small interaction > with > > > >the earth's magnetic field. > > > >So you say: "no variance, no induced currents" > > > >Using a multimeter and two brushes, measure the current between > internal > > > >copper circle and the external copper ring. Should be none isn't it ? > > > >( it's up to mA on this simple device and up to few amperes if the > brushes > > > >are made by mercury with low electrical contact resistence...) > > > >There are a few electricity generator patents with this subject. > > > >Take your on conclusions... > > > > > > > > > > > >regards, Vasile > > > > > > > >-- > > > >http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList > > > >mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics > (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics > > -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body