open-source-energy.org

So not only will a field bend out of shape from the field that is shown (like newman's in book)the spins will change the position of the electron ...not the spin direction though...just like a spinning top they keep going in their spin direction till they loose energy but go off on a path...unlike a spinning top that wobbles the electron will not it maintains its angular momentum so they differ there.

Squeezing the sponge is the pressure, if your sponge (wire) carries X amount of electrons and you can only release 1 per atom out of the atom then work out your electron mass per inch square of copper (or what ever way they work it) and the number of electrons your squeezing out from that,,,you cant squeeze anymore out. but there is a mean frequency or probability to how often they come out  hit something and go back in again over time and as they move at the speed of light this means for every time they pop out and in they are transferring energy from the atom.
Edit ..didn't mean work out electron mass, but quantity of electrons from that you can work out the  coulombs the amount of charge they take from the atom is quantised so you also need to work out how much charge it takes to make a electron move a shell. this is how much they actually release see data below

If I have got my point over you should now see, mass is the only real answer to getting the power to run large loads in a conventional electric circuit...so what we really want to do is use the energy from the spinning rotor or flywheel, that way you have a direct conversion from the atom to the load...just like Newman kept going on about. Solid state will never give you this.

If you do go it alone on solid state some of the data below will help, and it is also useful to see how much power we get from Newman's machine.
If you want to work out how much power you're going to get
an electron carries a charge of 1.6 x 10^-19 Coulombs
One coulomb equals (the negative of) the charge of 6.24×1018 electrons.
Since copper has a valence of one, and fundamental experiments have shown that these valence electrons behave just like free electrons density of copper atoms = (8.45x10^22 / cm^3) times the cross sectional area
A potential difference is measured in Volts.  A particle with charge equal to that of an electron will experience a 1 eV increase in energy for a 1 V increase in potential. 
Since this quantity has an algebraic sign you can both accelerate and decelerate charged particles.
And lastly don't forget your frequency of electrons springing in and out,  and by the coil length of time and frequency of ring(related voltage) it holds in the magnetic field. 
Times it all by the number of coils.
there's your math ratio, happy days...knock yourself out
so matt can you work with that
I may have missed some data but excuse my ignorance of what I yet have not learnt/know
So if you want to fill in a few blanks pls build a conventional Newman motor first with us.
Copper is a reactive element so we cannot rule out the eventual decay of the atom and the release of alpha particles which will have 2ev charge per 1V increase compared to the electron energy

read from reply #249 to here again and again. till you get it E=MC² conversion

thought,
in a really BIG coil... and a LONG wire... 
when emf is generated.... so is CEMF...

If enough atoms are aligned could one produce MORE  CEMF that EMF?

posibaly from the ringing of the coil in the RF range?

~Russ

the negative meter readings... here i come...

note to self, book pages 420-422 help understand the patent commutator.

and... more negative meter readings here i come :)

more usfull batter info on the next few pages...

referenced from page 559

cant say it any better...

ZZZZZzzzz...

Just a visual of the spinning interactions using spinning tops...
Now discount the revolving action of the tops spinning around one another, we are not interested in that as we have a alignment holding them in within a set area of probability. This area could be thought of as a dimple not unlike the dimples on a golf ball but in 2D using the spinning top as a example. spread the golf ball pattern across the blue arena area to help visualise a more steady electron.
what you do need to absorb is the interactions of the spin is transmitted from one to the other, some bounce furiously out when their energy levels are high compared to two lower energy levels which touch and kiss for a while.
but ultimately they all lose the spin to one another or to friction/heat.
In our electrons case as it loses the quantised energy and therefore spin it will not stop,  its returns to the atom valence shell from where it came. It is entangled.

 _{Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the others, even when the particles are separated by a large distance—instead, a quantum state must be described ..}


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1EUL5U-RIU

Now no electron bounces out of the set probability area it is confined to, unlike the spinning top...but that enables a force to transmit and this will rob the electron of momentum and energy.
For those people reading this thread without absorbing all that has been said before and having the view the electron is pure energy. therefore no physical spin. I am saying the electron is in a quantum state and acts like a dual particle where it takes on a physical attribute this can be reinforced  by the effects observed in the photoelectric phenomena. discount this as you might that effect.

We applied a voltage to align the atoms, this would be the same as applying a force to the electron. The work this force constitutes is the spin of the electron.
If a motor is already spinning and we give it more spin from a external force then the current in the motor will go down. when we have current go down in a motor the bemf can lead in the amount of current produced only while the motor is accelerating upto the momentum that the external voltage (force) we applied is going to spin it too...when it gets to the new rpm and a external force is(voltage) is keeping it there constant it will return to the status quo as I see it...It is the acceleration where you might see the BEMF producing more current than the emf in the alignment process...
Brain aching

I this case I'm. Talking about
Counter EMF not Back EMF...

Apply voltage and current to a coil and it will ring.

~Russ

So your talking about the voltage generated by the rotor shaft because of magnetic induction??

Russ

A word of caution, if you are generating large amounts of RF not only are there health concerns but also legal implications. Many inventors have claimed to have built FE devices based on RF sources however they also disrupted RF communications and not long after the boys in the black suits from the FCC came knocking. Personally I find it odd so few people have anything in the way of foresight so I am telling you now that there are very real dangers involved with creating a high frequency or RF based device.

You have to think about what your doing and as inventors we have a responsibility to do no harm. Tesla knew this and he also knew there was no way in hell anyone would ever allow his wireless power transmission system. Can you imagine the level of ignorance required in thinking that bathing the entire planet in a high magnitude very high frequency field which we now know causes cancer is a good idea?. Think about it... a spark gap or commutator producing long term broadband RF or microwave radiation in what is effectively a very long wire antenna and your at risk. This isn't amateur hour gentlemen and it is best to think about what your doing before you do it.

I would suggest you research RF and microwave radiation exposure then monitor all emissions with the appropriate equipment before you kill someone.

As well one could ask the question... why have many supposed FE devices never made it to market?. Was it because of some conspiracy or was it because the supposedly working device was unworkable in reality?. The fact remains that no device which generates large amounts of broadband RF will ever be allowed to go into production nor should it for obvious reasons.

That's right OnePower
I agree and have thought about it. But I will think harder.

Sonnet,  no not ezcatly.  Thats another matter that adds to the process.

I'm talking about EMF and Counter EMF. For every action there is an = and opposite reaction. 

The charging of a wire (EMF)  creates an aposing EMF  Or Counter EMF. Slightly diffrent than BEMF for me.

One can look at Lenz's law in a way.

I call BEMF what you see when you remove power from the wire. However any change in input going (down or less that what it already has applyed to it) can give you BEMF.

But more so a changing magnetic feild has a force oppiset that of the incoming feild. And in a wire that has current and voltage applied there is a force acting to apose its change. 

This was also talked about in the book. I'll need to refrence it for you. 

~Russ

Ok thanks for that. Regards

I think Newman had the right idea building a physically larger machine running at lower voltage and a lower cycle rate well below the RF spectrum. Tesla also came to his senses later on and transitioned from very high frequency AC systems to DC systems. There must be a happy medium to be found somewhere by maximizing the upside and minimizing the down side.

Imagine something half the size of a refrigerator chugging away in our basement for decades while supplying all our power needs. I think it's doable it's just going to take a little engineering to get it done.

Everyone seems to think smaller and faster and cheaper is better however I have a 1947 tractor that starts every time and runs like a top. That's a 70 year old tractor that still gets the job done because it's built to last and I expect it could run another 70 years. Smaller, faster, cheaper isn't always better if it creates more problems than it solves.

Hello Everyone,

I have a question for someone,
does the Inductive Reactance apply to the Newman Motor or is the Inductive Reactance only for the AC and not pulsed DC circuit ?

Why am i asking ? because of the long time digging on the Official Newman Website i found this:
The Amp-Turn so-called "Law" is not the law of nature

I'll keep it short.
In the First test he applyed:
12V  0.2A  60Ohm which is 2.4W and the Newman motor did not run.

In the Second test he applyed:
50V  0.01A  5000Ohm which is 0.5W and the witness could not stop the Newman motor even with his both hands.

He sad that the number of turns did not change in any of the tests.

So, i'm thinking that the only solution is the Inductive Reactance, am i right on this ?
 

welcome, Tavote,

have a look at book pages 297 for some more incite on that question.
http://open-source-energy.org/rwg42985/russ/newman/The%20Energy%20Machine%20of%20Joseph%20Newman%208th%20Edition.pdf

your gonna want to read the entire book to grasp it all.

your question is valid though. one thing Newman was not good at was to do " electronics" so all those things i also have questions about and we should all think about how capacitance, inductance, and the like effect the device in its understood functionality.

dont for get Pulsed DC in not really DC, it acts kinda like AC but the major difference is the "water hammer effect" you dont get this with most AC. unless you in the extremely high frequency. however even then its not quite the same...

~Russ

amore thought on this,

If we are using pulsed DC,

when we apply voltage, that voltage will start to clime BEFORE the current.
in the right coil... current begins when the voltage reaches its maximum.
so in the right coil it might be possible to achieve an effect where the voltage starts to go and reaches close to top voltage, , then right as the current starts we have alignment,. at that exact point we turn it off. remember we only need a tinny bit of current to align the atoms.
but because the voltage is already very high its almost instant that the field is made. then by turning off the input we get a very high spike, then we short it, and because there is inertia things keep going forward. the magnet helps this as well...

also refer back to this

~Russ

watch closely... he talks about CEMF! @ 28. min but watch the entire thing. its all good stuff!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3ejA2qubuU

ha funny... its at the peeks of the voltage wave... its like the inverse to the coil shorting... instead of shorting we are opening. then sorting because we are dealing with DC... well pulsed DC. ..

~Russ

@ Russ
thank you for that vid russ,
What does stand out for me, I always assumed the voltage created a magnetic field and I heard folks telling me nooo. current creates the field.

But in that explanation you have the CEMF created by flux cutting the wires from the voltage rising...long before current starts...so is it not true voltage creates the magnetism but current keeps it there.