Here is an experiment I just did:
I got a soft iron u shaped core about 10mm thick and about 125mm in length. I wound 2 coils of 28 gauge wire but wound them opposite and place them on either prong of the core right up near the u bend. They were tight fitting close to the core. I then shorted the coils in parallel.
I then built a system where I had a remote control car gear box and motor connected to a shaft and at the end of the shaft was a bog standard cd. On the cd I placed 2 neodimium magnets opposite each other but placed so that they had opposite magnetic fields. I then placed the core prongs between the cd so that when the cd spun it created a generator.
Coupled the ocilloscope and a voltage meter and did all sorts of tests.
I measured and scoped the 2 shorts and a dc pulsed voltage was produced but lens law was cancelled because the 2 apposing coils and magnetic fields cancelled each other out.
I concluded:
You can cancel lens's law by wiring coils in opposition so that the forward and back emf cancel each other out but when opposite magnetic fields are passed through this system a pulse train is created. The pulse train is a vector of cancellation directions. In other words if you cancel something in one direction then cancel it in the other direction the mere fact you have done so creates an apposing field potential in the form of a dc pulse.
More to follow.

Hi, that is very interesting... I would like to know the dc pulse rate , frequency. and voltage spikes. I would be interested to see if you can now power a Rodin coil at the short..


cheers.. good job.

Quote from freethisone on June 15th, 2014, 12:28 PM

Hi, that is very interesting... I would like to know the dc pulse rate , frequency. and voltage spikes. I would be interested to see if you can now power a Rodin coil at the short..


cheers.. good job.

The frequency was quite strange. The original coils were producing 10 hz when they had a single magnetic field passing through them, when two opposite magneic fields passed through the hert rate dropped to 5hz but it becomes a 50% duty cycle dc waveform. If you rectify this voltage with a diode it tries to become full dc with a 99% duty cycle that sends the scope bananas. Its been a quite strange set of tests.

Quote from nav on June 15th, 2014, 02:31 PM

The frequency was quite strange. The original coils were producing 10 hz when they had a single magnetic field passing through them, when two opposite magneic fields passed through the hert rate dropped to 5hz but it becomes a 50% duty cycle dc waveform. If you rectify this voltage with a diode it tries to become full dc with a 99% duty cycle that sends the scope bananas. Its been a quite strange set of tests.

it would also be interesting if you had a second horse shoe magnet wound, and powered by a second power source, rotated in the same manner as the cd disc neo magnets axis. O:-).

Quote from freethisone on June 15th, 2014, 03:06 PM

it would also be interesting if you had a second horse shoe magnet wound, and powered by a second power source, rotated in the same manner as the cd disc neo magnets axis. O:-).

I did the same test as this guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-yDRf0UN0Y#ws
I was interested in what he was talking about. I slowed down my rotation of the wheel with a remote control car gearbox and instead of using big clumsy magnets I used neodimium on a cd. My coil is smaller gauge wire and I have 500 turns on each coil but they are shorted like bucking coils.
I wanted to scope the results and it shows a 50% duty cycle 5hz dc waveform which is built by two 10 hz ac waveforms on the scope. It is kind of an hybrid waveform.
Lens law seems to be cancelled because of the cancellation of the ac but dc power is still usuble. I'm going to see how long it takes to charge a cap with this system.

mr angus is great, what i would do is add the rodin coil at the light bulb connection, test the magnetic field of the coil..

i was also thinking of adding a quartz type insulator to part of the coil.

What seems to happen is:- if you short the coils out bucking style and introduce a magnetic field that is bi-directional, it causes a polyphased positive bias in one direction and a polyphase negative bias in the other direction on the scope. When you tap the coils at the shorts an hybrid signwave appears that wants to be both ac and dc at the same time. When a resister is added the dc seems to become more prominant. Did some furthur testing yesterday on utilizing flux flow on the u shaped core and got some pretty amazing results on the scope.
If you bias the flux flow with a u shaped magnet by adding it to the iron core the voltage goes up by 20%. If you turn the magnet around it decreases the voltage by at least 30%. That is with a one directional stater magnetic field at 8hz. Through other experiments i've seen I would guess this restricts amp flow in a huge way and has massive benefits. The testing continues.......

A polyphase system is a means of distributing alternating-current electrical power. Polyphase systems have three or more energized electrical conductors carrying alternating currents with a definite time offset between the voltage waves in each conductor. Polyphase systems are particularly useful for transmitting power to electric motors. The most common example is the three-phase power system used for industrial applications and for power transmission. A major advantage of three phase power transmission [using three conductors], (as compared to single phase power transmission [using two conductors]), is that, since the remaining conductors act as the return path for any single conductor, the power transmitted by a balanced three phase system is three times that of a single phase transmission but only one extra conductor is used. Thus, a 50% increase in the transmission costs achieves a 200% increase in the power transmitted.


from wiki, perhaps the answer may lie in these words. a third conductor, 3 ac waves . so you have the third wave isolated at the light bulb? some how u need to add a third conductor or coil?

wireless electric motor? is this a Tesla based plan?

Its not 3 phase, its 2 phase. You have 2 phases of ac biased on one side and the opposite on the other. Done a lot more testing this morning and the flux flow magnetic flow test is simply a test of how efficient transformer cores are. You can't cut current off and increase voltage by making the flux more powerful in one direction than the other. Adding magnets to the core just makes a more efficient core by cutting resistive losses from the core materials.

lots of ideas, what if the u magnet was 6 feet long and 4 inches thick?  i would shoot for a lag time in the waves. i woul see if i can make the waves longer or shorter with smaller, or larger u magnets. i would increase the flux of the cd magnets with steel.

have you see the magnet video i put up?

special

uses special techniques to cause a flow of magnetic waves. cheers O:-)

Keep at it nav.  I have my QMoGen test bed all setup and I'll looking for any ideas you might be able to come up with to try next.

The Angus Effect

Lenz cancelling toroids

That first video is interesting. I had the same results in the current draw. 320 milliamps with the coils in conventional pattern and 200 milliamps with the coils shorted bucking style.
He gets it wrong about the direction of the magmetic flux flow though. The flux from the magnetic field at the magnets does not flow from North to one coil and then from south to the other coil. The flux flow is circular around the u shaped core at C minus resistance or velocity factor.
The flux flows from south magnet around the core to the north magnet or vice versa. It is interesting how two extremely large coils are only wired into two dc motors that only take a few volts to drive, he didn't show us the ac voltage coming out of the coils at all.
An interesting experiment what I did is to short the coils bucking style and then instead of driving magnets through the coils you pulse 12vdc from a PWM into them so that the core becomes an electromagnet. You find out because the coils are wound opposite on each side it actually cancels the magnetic field completely and the core is not magnetic. This is inverse of what happens when you push magnets through and create a generator. So we know that the motor effect of Lens law is definately cancelled when it runs as a generator and thats why it speeds up. The push pull is slightly biased positive.
What the guy doesn't tell you is when you try to use the ac directly from the coils it sort of cancels out and very little is usable. The dc side of it seems to be more usable.

Quote from nav on June 23rd, 2014, 08:55 AM

That first video is interesting. I had the same results in the current draw. 320 milliamps with the coils in conventional pattern and 200 milliamps with the coils shorted bucking style.
He gets it wrong about the direction of the magmetic flux flow though. The flux from the magnetic field at the magnets does not flow from North to one coil and then from south to the other coil. The flux flow is circular around the u shaped core at C minus resistance or velocity factor.
The flux flows from south magnet around the core to the north magnet or vice versa. It is interesting how two extremely large coils are only wired into two dc motors that only take a few volts to drive, he didn't show us the ac voltage coming out of the coils at all.
An interesting experiment what I did is to short the coils bucking style and then instead of driving magnets through the coils you pulse 12vdc from a PWM into them so that the core becomes an electromagnet. You find out because the coils are wound opposite on each side it actually cancels the magnetic field completely and the core is not magnetic. This is inverse of what happens when you push magnets through and create a generator. So we know that the motor effect of Lens law is definately cancelled when it runs as a generator and thats why it speeds up. The push pull is slightly biased positive.
What the guy doesn't tell you is when you try to use the ac directly from the coils it sort of cancels out and very little is usable. The dc side of it seems to be more usable.

Im happy you did these experiments.,so in other words the flow flux is in a figure 8, through the core, and no magnetic field is made? but if you go against the grain of flux you have induction, and losses? increase of amp due to heat.or eddys..

Take a look at the picture I attached. Figure 1 shows the magnet between the core. The magnetic flux cannot be stopped from the magnets when the inductors are at charge stage. The flux is a circular pattern through the magnet and around the core just like in a transformer which I have marked as green. When the magnet is removed the inductors collapse into voltage but because of the left to right rule they collapse in the opposite direction north to north and south to south. This cancels the motor effect and is why the gen speeds up, the motor rather than being an opposition to the gen it becomes a slight positive forward bias and helps it. In other words the motor effect no longer tries to pull the gen back but becomes a slight push. This produces a cancelled signwave as marked at the end of the blue shorted wires. In figure 2, we put a 12vdc pulse into the coils. When the PWM voltage is at + on the duty cycle the coils are being charged and when it drops to minus on the duty cycle to coils collapse into voltage but again they are collapsing at the left to right rule and collapse in a cancellation pattern. That pattern causes a two norths at the top of the core and two souths at the bottom cancelling the magnetic field.
The reason Lens law is cancelled on this system is because when ever the coils collapse they follow the left to right rule and oppose each other, this cancels the magnetic field in the core so the motor effect doesn't effect the generator in a push pull scenario. But the problem is that the ac voltage isn't much use under load, it seems to disappear when a resistive load of any higher value is added.

Now, this information is very, very important when you consider what Stan Meyer is doing. In stan's schematic figured below we see the two inductors wound bucking style. Here is a fact: the choke marked 56 cannot collapse the way nature and the left to right rule intends it to do so because of the diode marked 55 and the open circuit at the cap at B+(71). But the other choke marked 62 can collapse in its natural way.
When the two chokes collapse into voltage simulataneously they produde opposing magnetic fields and the way back to the secondary coil marked 52 is blocked because the flux flow is cancelled in both directions. Therefore no back emf can get back to the secondary (52) through the core. The natural way back emf gets back to the secondary through the wire is also blocked via the diode.
So here is the conclusion I have formed through my experiments which translates into Meyers schematic:
When the induction of the secondary (52) collapses into voltage it creates induction in the two chokes (56&62) via the core of the transformer. When those two respective chokes collapse into voltage the magnetic field they each produce is opposite cancelling any flux movement in the core and restricting back emf in the core back to the secondary. That fact I have proven.  Those two chokes have to collapse because of the change in current to them but because of cancellation the voltage isn't usable and in Meyer's schematic it would cause the cap terminals (71&61) to be either both positive or negative. Stan gets around that by using a diode so that he gets a positive and a negative at the cap. But there is still a cancellation problem because the chokes are naturally acting as a diode against each other anyway so what is the answer?
The answer lies in the choke numbered 62 which is variable. I have proven this fact too that I am about to tell you: if you make choke 62 slightly stronger than choke 56 by a factor of 5%, the magnetic flux flow is still cancelled in the core and back emf is restricted - but you have created a bias in the flow of the diode with extra voltage. It is this extra voltage that creates a potential at B+ and B- because caps just can't help themselves.
Now in the case of Angus, if he wants to collect energy from the coils that are wound bucking style he has to do the same. If you look at the drawing to the right of Stan's schematic you will see the magnet between the coil. The magnet is the exact same as the secondary coil in Stan's schematic - it provides power in the form of flux. the flux induces the two coils and when the magnet is removed there is a change in current and the inductors collapse into voltage. Again the voltage is cancelled because of the laws of nature and the flux flow is cancelled in the core. But because the coil on the right is slightly more powerful it creates voltage on C1 without interupting the flux cancellation and the diode keeps it directional.
So in essence, if we create a 95% cancellation which shuts down the flux flow we can still  steal the remaining 5% of power from one coil without the magnet noticing and Lens law is cancelled. I think Henderson gens are doing the same as well as other gens.
ONE OF THE COILS IS A SACRIFICIAL LAMB.

.
I'm not the smartest cookie in the box, (Thinking out loud, if it is permitted.) but it looks like your trying to build a transformer that outputs high voltage DC.
Would a copper disk passing through a magnetic one-way flux ring not produce a steady dc voltage potential between the outer edge and center of the copper disk? (after thinking up the thing and asking around I found out it's called a Homopolar generator.)
If that is so, couldn't you add more copper disks, or change speed of rotation, or starength of magnetic field to produce desired voltage?
(My understanding of a Homopolar generator is that they have very low cemf.)

Quote from Nicadeamas on June 24th, 2014, 08:55 PM

.
I'm not the smartest cookie in the box, (Thinking out loud, if it is permitted.) but it looks like your trying to build a transformer that outputs high voltage DC.
Would a copper disk passing through a magnetic one-way flux ring not produce a steady dc voltage potential between the outer edge and center of the copper disk? (after thinking up the thing and asking around I found out it's called a Homopolar generator.)
If that is so, couldn't you add more copper disks, or change speed of rotation, or starength of magnetic field to produce desired voltage?
(My understanding of a Homopolar generator is that they have very low cemf.)

Actually what i'm doing is cancelling Lens's law in a generator with two inductors that oppose each other. The inductors produce cancellation in the flux on the core and if you bias one of the coils with a small amount of voltage then half rectify it, you can charge a capacitor with some lens free energy.

nav, can you find a way to prove how much mis-match in the two inductors is needed for an optimal setup?  You mentioned 95% and 90%, but it would be nice to know if this biasing has some optimal value.  Then the next task is obviously to determine how much lenz-less energy can be collected and compare this with input energy to the motor to see if over-unity is possible.  From what you are saying, if we can collect more output than we lose in the frictional components of the drive motor assembly and the inefficiency of the motor itself, we should be able to loop this contraption.

Taking the basic understanding you have presented, I'm seriously trying to find a way to re-engineer other generators to behave the same way.  Seems it should be doable.  See where I'm going with this I hope:  It may be possible to modify readily available generators and build QMoGens of any desired power output needed.  This would be huge.

Quote from Matt Watts on June 25th, 2014, 12:09 PM

nav, can you find a way to prove how much mis-match in the two inductors is needed for an optimal setup?  You mentioned 95% and 90%, but it would be nice to know if this biasing has some optimal value.  Then the next task is obviously to determine how much lenz-less energy can be collected and compare this with input energy to the motor to see if over-unity is possible.  From what you are saying, if we can collect more output than we lose in the frictional components of the drive motor assembly and the inefficiency of the motor itself, we should be able to loop this contraption.

Taking the basic understanding you have presented, I'm seriously trying to find a way to re-engineer other generators to behave the same way.  Seems it should be doable.  See where I'm going with this I hope:  It may be possible to modify readily available generators and build QMoGens of any desired power output needed.  This would be huge.

i'd need to build a variable inductor. My mismatch was 5% by accident and that allowed flux cancellation and voltage left over. I wonder if Angus who does the Youtube video's knows that the voltage he sees on his meter is actually due to an inductance mismatch in his coils?
Those coils he uses are 18 gauge wire and are huge, I would normally expect to see ac voltages from those size coils in the hundreds of volts wired normally but the most he has seen is 16vac? Surely he's got to realise at some point the voltage is due to an inductance mismatch and cancellation?

By the way, frequency becomes key to this too. The higher the frequency the quicker the system works on loading the caps up. In fact, in Meyer's schematic if you don't provide a way of gating the frequency you would overload the cap within milliseconds and probably cause a dielectric breakdown. Where ever you set the inductors to collect the bias, you will still have to gate the system in some way unless you bring the frequency right down and then you are throwing away huge amounts of potential energy. The system is ingeneous though - i wish i'd have thought of it.

Dumping of the caps is relatively straightforward using Doug Konzen's (Konehead's) circuits.  If you haven't tried this, I do recommend taking some time to do it.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Doug_Konzen_%28Konehead%29_on_Self-Looped_Generators

This coupled with the inductor mis-match nav has found may well be the ticket.

The really funny thing about all this is when people have wound coils in the past bucking style to investigate this, the more accurate they are winding the coils the less successful they have been. If you get close to 100% prefection and cancellation there is 0% energy available to tap off. These people must have been thinking WTF!
All the people that have wired an electromagnet unsuccessfully by wiring two coils opposite on the same core and thought 'this doesn't work', all along had in their hands a means to cancel Lens law and never even knew it.

lenz effect linier gen..

Quote from nav on June 25th, 2014, 01:39 PM

The really funny thing about all this is when people have wound coils in the past bucking style to investigate this, the more accurate they are winding the coils the less successful they have been. If you get close to 100% prefection and cancellation there is 0% energy available to tap off. These people must have been thinking WTF!
All the people that have wired an electromagnet unsuccessfully by wiring two coils opposite on the same core and thought 'this doesn't work', all along had in their hands a means to cancel Lens law and never even knew it.

if this is so,you can wire a track, and a cart.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1RCk-1tYbg#

pause vid at 15 min 49 sec to see how he wired the coils.. the bias is Asymmetry.in both directions.

just a thought: even though the waves cancel each other out, they should still be present if the waves travel through each other, like water waves in opposite directions cancel each other out but still pass through each other.: