Quote

How is it possible to connect a power source to a coil, then disconnect this power source from the coil before (based on the speed of light) electrical energy can get to the opposite end of the coil?

I am just going to use another simple analogy for this, I have already discussed it before.  I am just trying to help people visualize what is taking place.  People use the flywheel analogy for a coil, but a moving mass is also 100% analogous.  Here is the proof in the pudding:  The energy stored in a coil with current flowing through it is 1/2 L i-squared.  The energy stored in a moving mass is 1/2 M v-squared.  See the similarities?  They say a coil has electrical inertia and resists changes in current flow.  Needless to say, if you are talking about a big boat it clearly has a lot of inertia.

There is a 25-foot boat moored in a marina.  The water is perfectly still.  You walk up to the boat and push on the stern to get it moving.  The boat weights ten thousand pounds and if you are lucky after two minutes of sweat you might move it a half-inch.  Well the boat in the marina is exactly exactly like a big coil.

So if you hit the stern of the boat once with a big rubber mallet, what's going to happen?  The answer is not much.  Hitting the boat with the big rubber mallet is like connecting a voltage source to the big coil for a fraction of a second.  Both the boat and the coil aren't going to budge.

This is real physics, and this is what you are going to see on the bench.

That's assuming the boat isn't already moving.

The analog to the water's drag would be resistance in the coil, I presume. This is why I say we should be exploring means of minimizing the coil's resistance (such as coating the wire with graphene, which has the lowest room-temperature resistance of any known material, prior to insulating the wire). It'd be akin to putting that boat up on hydrofoils.

Now, if the boat were already moving (even slowly), it'll take less to keep it moving. After all, the pistons and drivetrain in that boat's engine are nothing more than a percussion translated into rotation translated into linear motion... they're the "hammers" hitting the stern of the boat via the prop.

Once the initial inertia is overcome to get either the boat moving or the coil "spinning", it takes less to keep it going. The lower the resistance, the less it takes to keep it going. Reference MRI magnets, which emanate a magnetic field with very little power input, because they're cooled below the critical temperature and hence are superconductors. Some gravimeter superconducting magnets have been running for as long as 22 years with no additional power input.

The only other way to do it is to exploit the induced magnetic field and applied frequency to generate phonons which will cause boson pairing (Cooper pairs)... in essence converting the electrons into a room-temperature bosonic superfluid, which exhibits zero resistance. But the engineering to do that would be far beyond the capabilities of... well, everyone, everywhere, thus far. Except, apparently, Newman himself. And possibly Searl.

One problem I foresee is that phonon frequency in copper is highly temperature-dependent... so we'd need some sort of temperature feedback loop which adjusts frequency to maintain phonon density.

Another problem I foresee is that the Debye temperature (corresponding to the phonon cut-off frequency) of copper is 158.63 F. Go above that, and you get no phonons.

A third problem is that the phonon frequency of copper is quite high... approximately 6.6 - 7.3 THz. So the coil would have to be designed to 'ring-down' near this frequency. Conversely, iron has a phonon frequency of ~5.39 - 10.49 GHz... perhaps that's why some experimenters used iron wire. Which experimenter was it who said they'd made more power from iron than they ever made from copper?

And of course, the main consideration as regards phonons is phonon density, which is dependent upon the differential energy variation within the coil... so we'd have to ensure the coil has sufficient energy gradient per unit time to maintain phonon density... meaning high voltages and quick on/off times.

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 5th, 2018, 11:40 PM

There is a 25-foot boat moored in a marina.  The water is perfectly still.  You walk up to the boat and push on the stern to get it moving.  The boat weights ten thousand pounds and if you are lucky after two minutes of sweat you might move it a half-inch.  Well the boat in the marina is exactly exactly like a big coil.

So if you hit the stern of the boat once with a big rubber mallet, what's going to happen?  The answer is not much.  Hitting the boat with the big rubber mallet is like connecting a voltage source to the big coil for a fraction of a second.  Both the boat and the coil aren't going to budge.

This is real physics, and this is what you are going to see on the bench.

That is staring from a dead stop.

What if the boat is already moving and U gave a nudge ?

Ooops! Cycle beat me by 3 minutes...lol

If the boat is already moving and you whack it with a big mallet then nothing really happens, the boat keeps moving at the same speed.  That is like a big coil with current flowing through it and you pulse it with a very short pulse of voltage, the amount of current flowing in the coil does not change.

If you want to split hairs then when you whack the boat with a big mallet while it is moving it undergoes an infinitesimal change in speed.

Russ,

Quote

If its reversed is the magnetic field also reversed?

Let's clear up some misconceptions about the magnetic field.  In one of your clips you mention the magnetic fields from two magnets in repulsion "compressing" against each other creating the force you feel on the magnet.

All magnetic fields are vectors with magnitude and direction.  When you hold a magnet in each hand north-to-north you feel the repulsive force.  It's easy to imagine that the two magnetic fields are "compressing" against each other and also that the two magnetic fields are "bending away" from each other and that is what creates the force you feel in your hands but that is not actually happening.

What is actually happening is the two magnetic fields from the two magnets are passing right through each other like the other magnetic field isn't even there.  It sounds counter-intuitive but that is exactly what is happening - they pass right though each other.  However, they are vector entities and at any point in space, there is a net magnetic field that represents the vector addition of the magnetic fields from the two magnets.  When you look at that net magnetic fields, say you are visualizing them with iron filings, it appears that the two magnetic fields are "compressing" and "bending away" from each other but I repeat, that is not actually happening.  When you do the vector addition, the net magnetic field simply has the appearance of compressing and bending but that is not really happening.

So, now that you know this, it is much easier to imagine what is happening inside a coil with current flowing through it when you bring another magnet up close to the coil.  Supposing that you move the north face of a magnet up to the north face of a coil.  Well, eventually the two north vectors will cancel each other out until there is a point inside the coil where the net magnetic field is zero.

It's all just simple vector addition and no more than that.

This brings up an interesting question:  When you hold a magnet in your hand you can say that you are creating a "magnetic bubble."  What does that mean, a "magnetic bubble?"

SS

So if there is no "compressing" and "bending" between two magnetic fields then where does the force come from?

The answer to that is that it all has to do with the magnetic field gradient.  "Gradient" means the strength of the magnetic field changes as you move towards or away from the magnet.   See the attached image.

Some of you may have had an experience where you push two opposing magnets together and when they are say about one millimeter away from each other, the repulsion force magically disappears.  Typically this happens when the magnets are the same size and shape and strength.

The explanation for that is fairly straightforward:  1)  The two magnetic fields are cancelling each other out such that the net magnetic field between the two magnet faces is actually very weak, and more importantly 2) the gradient of the net magnetic field in the small space between the two magnets starts to approach zero as the magnets are very close together.  With no gradient in the magnetic field there is no repulsive force.

SS,  I have looked at this vector math before and I have to say that if we take what newman gives us with the action reaction effect then the vector math should explain more than It dose. 

I feel the mechanical Interacation is way better than the math.  As its a physical thing.  Math is jist that,  math,  and its only so close to reality . 

With that said I'd like to see SS explain using Newmans work vector math,  this would explain alot more...

Just my 2 centce. 

~Russ

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 6th, 2018, 10:39 AM

Some of you may have had an experience where you push two opposing magnets together and when they are say about one millimeter away from each other, the repulsion force magically disappears.  Typically this happens when the magnets are the same size and shape and strength.

Could you give an example of this?
I have never experienced this, nor seen a demonstration of this happening with common magnets.

Quote

If there is voltage and current in the coil from the battery, ( lets say 100V @ +1ma) and then we induce more voltage in the coil than we are putting in so that the current is going backwards, (110V @ -1ma)  10.what happens to the magnet field? 11.is it still going in the same direction or is is stopped / nall'd? 12.or is it reversed as the meters say (negative)?

thoughts
A10) The field should not have changed (flipped) or the rotor will stop...no buts that's just reality...
A11) ?The field cant stop it is polarized and will grow or fall. It can be negated though but this would have a effect on rotation.
A12) If the current in the wire is reversed then the charge outside the wire (the capacitance ) the greater of the two may still flow against the wire current direction? my only visual to this is put a running garden hose and face it upstream in a river...would the garden hose reverse the river? A)No  so is there a chance the same can be said for our reverse current flow..?
How does a mind answer those questions ...lol.. mind blowing.

Quote

13.If its reversed is the magnetic field also reversed?  14.dose the current need to be going in the correct direction to keep the magnetic field in the same polarity if there is 100V and +1ma already applied? 15.we never changed the polarity of the voltage applied, only the current direction?

A13) If current in wire is reversed yes magnetic field is reversed, if you are counting that atoms are kept aligned by the current flow.
A14)Again current in the wire does need to go the same direction.
A15) Did the capacitance want to flow in the opposite direction ??? to the resistive power
sorry mad (defying logic) questions deserve mad answers

Quote from itzon on February 6th, 2018, 04:28 PM

Could you give an example of this?
I have never experienced this, nor seen a demonstration of this happening with common magnets.

I tried a little bit of searching but did not find anything.  But have you ever had the experience where you push two magnets together in repulsion and when they come close together they actually start to get  attracted to each other? Presumably one magnet is say 10% stronger than the other magnet and when they come together the net magnetic field is not zero and one magnet dominates over or nullifies the effect of the other magnet and you get attraction.  This is fairly easy to reproduce.

If you can reproduce the attraction phenomenon then common sense is telling you that between the normal repulsion and the somewhat unexpected attraction there is a point where there is no attraction or repulsion.

To the best of my recollection I did the "loss of repulsion" experiment with those smaller weaker magnets, the brownish type that have a rubbery texture.  I am talking about magnets smaller than the tip of your finger.  I don't even know what that material is called.  I really doubt that you can repeat this experiment easily with powerful neo magnets.  But if you mounted two neos in a proper jig with a strain gauge and stuff like that you would probably be able to see the phenomenon.

In this Newman motor you are playing with Lenz's law and trying to figure out what happens when you energize an air coil with a battery and then start wiggling a powerful magnet around in the vicinity of the coil.   Two things are happening at the same time, the battery is driving the coil and there is an external magnet wiggling around having an effect on the coil.  A general principle that applies in electronics is superposition of effects.  You have two separate effects from two different agents and in general you simply add the effects together.  But you want a reality check so you do some bench testing.

So, let's assume that you have a regular air coil about the size of medium-small spool of wire.  Heck, you can even use a medium-small spool of wire.  You take your bench power supply as a voltage source and hook it up to the coil and set the voltage so that say 300 milliamperes of current is flowing through the coil.  You put one scope channel on the coil voltage and you use your scope current probe to monitor the coil current.  So you wiggle the magnet around and play with the polarities, with the amount of flux by adjusting the distance, and with the all-important (in fact the most important) rate of change of flux that cuts through the loop of the coil with respect to time.  If you don't get this "rate of change with respect to time" business then you are toast.  Presumably, you will be able to make the current flow through the coil reverse.  And then when you do that you can disconnect the power supply, wiggle the magnet around in the same fashion, and observe if the open-circuit EMF that you are inducing in the coil is indeed higher than the power supply voltage.

Now, I will throw a curve ball at you.  You have all seen that a standard bench power supply has separate knobs for current and voltage, or digital controls that do the same thing.   So, repeat the above but this time configure your bench power supply as a current source and set it to 300 milliamperes.  Do you observe different effects this time and why?  How do you explain what you are observing and how do you explain the different results between the power supply as a voltage source test and the power supply as a current source test?  If this is new territory for you then you need to do some research.

Why is this relevant?  Well, if you do both tests and get a mastery over them then you will be able to apply that knowledge to a Newman motor and all sorts of other experiments.  But more importantly, a discharging coil is in fact a current source, so if you want to understand coils you have to understand the ins and outs of a current source.  Why does the coil produce plasma when you open-circuit it?  The short and sweet answer is that it is a current source.

Quote from ~Russ on February 6th, 2018, 01:26 PM

SS,  I have looked at this vector math before and I have to say that if we take what newman gives us with the action reaction effect then the vector math should explain more than It dose. 

I feel the mechanical Interacation is way better than the math.  As its a physical thing.  Math is jist that,  math,  and its only so close to reality . 

With that said I'd like to see SS explain using Newmans work vector math,  this would explain alot more...

Just my 2 centce. 

~Russ

I am not really sure how to answer that, I am not sure what the action-reaction effect is.  Sorry, I still haven't read your doc.  I was discussing magnetic fields and they are indeed defined as a vector entity and it's a generic thing that applies to everything you do with magnetics.  Likewise, electric fields are defined as a vector entity, always, everywhere.

If I can make one comment, it's easy to talk about magnetic fields in all sorts of broad discussions.  However, you can never forget that there must be moving charges, electric current, linked to the existence of those magnetic fields.  And it goes the other way, electric currents are linked to the existence of magnetic fields.  Whenever you discuss magnetic fields in these broad discussions, if you can't account for the electric current then there is something amiss in your discussion.

Thoughts
When is a current not a current?

A) When it's a stored charge...

So it's safe to assume if the current changes direction the the magnetism will.

If charge is stored then magnetism does not change, unless potential changes.
Only if charge is moving (current) , will we get change in magnetism.

Thoughts
If we introduce charge into a circuit without voltage then there is no current and no change to magnetic field.

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 6th, 2018, 07:41 PM

I am not really sure how to answer that, I am not sure what the action-reaction effect is.  Sorry, I still haven't read your doc.  I was discussing magnetic fields and they are indeed defined as a vector entity and it's a generic thing that applies to everything you do with magnetics.  Likewise, electric fields are defined as a vector entity, always, everywhere.

If I can make one comment, it's easy to talk about magnetic fields in all sorts of broad discussions.  However, you can never forget that there must be moving charges, electric current, linked to the existence of those magnetic fields.  And it goes the other way, electric currents are linked to the existence of magnetic fields.  Whenever you discuss magnetic fields in these broad discussions, if you can't account for the electric current then there is something amiss in your discussion.

yes i'm with you, and some good thoughts there, also thanks for being honest, we like that around here :)

from Roger Hastings. Phd,

"This is stated in no uncertain terms in Maxwell's book "A Dynamical Theory of the
Electromagnetic Field". In fact, Maxwell used a dynamical model to derive his famous equations.
This fact has all but been lost in current books on electromagnetic theory. The quantity which
Maxwell called "electromagnetic momentum" is now referred to as the "vector potential"."

and there for missing parts are not in the vector math, again, just looking at things from a fundamental perspective,  if a math will tell the story then it SHOULD include ALL views of reality. and i also get that we have to start some where...

but we cant just leave out stuff. and im not saying that i know Vector math very well, so i cant argue the point, that's why i mentioned that it would be good for someone to match up what Newmans teaches with vector math, and see where the differences are and the same things.

~Russ

Quote from sonnet on February 7th, 2018, 09:38 AM

Thoughts
If we introduce charge into a circuit without voltage then there is no current and no change to magnetic field.

if you connect a coil at one end to the + of a battery... and  the other end open... there is " charge " with no current flow, and the entire coil is "charged" in reference to ground, again supporting the reason why " voltage is instant" . now what happens if we switch the coil on at both ends at the same time... results will differ?
~Russ

Quote

if you connect a coil at one end to the + of a battery... and  the other end open... there is " charge " with no current flow, and the entire coil is "charged" in reference to ground, again supporting the reason why " voltage is instant" . now what happens if we switch the coil on at both ends at the same time... results will differ?
~Russ

I take it you mean close switch to - negative while instantaneously opening switch from + positive using the big coil.?

Have we got any test from reading the current flow whilst the coil is in the short, i.e. only in the short....put a charge into the coil and turn magnet so we see current flow only in the short without letting it back out or stopping. reason being...can we see change in field? and compare to current flow when...
coil is induced by rotating magnet with no short included.

Russ,

The way it appears to me is that on this thread there was lots and lots of high-level talk about theories about magnetic fields and quantum electrodynamics and all sorts of other esoteric stuff and not much talk about actually testing the device on the bench.  This is where everyone has to deal with the reality of what the scope is telling you and how to formulate effective tests and understanding the basic underlying principles and mechanisms at play.

So now after all the talk you actually have the motor built and running.  You seem to be holding out hope that a bigger coil will somehow work some magic but the reality is one big coil and another bigger coil are still fundamentally just coils.  They operate in the same way that a small coil the size of your pinky would operate.  Newman states that more mass of copper is the key.  Well, you already have a lot of mass of copper on your bench, are you seeing anything?  I realize that it is still early in the game.  Perhaps more importantly, what kind of tests are you supposed to do to see something?

Rolling back even further, my sense is that for the thread posters and also for yourself, understanding what is going on when you have a powered coil and a moving magnet next to the coil is a challenge.  This is where you are trying to understand the energy dynamics, because this is all about understanding the energy dynamics of the Newman motor and if there is any "Newman pixie dust" to be found, you have to understand the basic energy dynamics first so that you can recognize the pixie dust if it is there.  And we are talking energy here, not vector math.  A big part of the focus needs to be on energy and the energy dynamics.

I can suggest some simple tests for you that I alluded to in an earlier posting and the gained knowledge can then be applied to the Newman motor, but it is all up to you, it's your project.

SS

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 7th, 2018, 11:25 AM

Russ,

The way it appears to me is that on this thread there was lots and lots of high-level talk about theories about magnetic fields and quantum electrodynamics and all sorts of other esoteric stuff and not much talk about actually testing the device on the bench.  This is where everyone has to deal with the reality of what the scope is telling you and how to formulate effective tests and understanding the basic underlying principles and mechanisms at play.

So now after all the talk you actually have the motor built and running.  You seem to be holding out hope that a bigger coil will somehow work some magic but the reality is one big coil and another bigger coil are still fundamentally just coils.  They operate in the same way that a small coil the size of your pinky would operate.  Newman states that more mass of copper is the key.  Well, you already have a lot of mass of copper on your bench, are you seeing anything?  I realize that it is still early in the game.  Perhaps more importantly, what kind of tests are you supposed to do to see something?

Rolling back even further, my sense is that for the thread posters and also for yourself, understanding what is going on when you have a powered coil and a moving magnet next to the coil is a challenge.  This is where you are trying to understand the energy dynamics, because this is all about understanding the energy dynamics of the Newman motor and if there is any "Newman pixie dust" to be found, you have to understand the basic energy dynamics first so that you can recognize the pixie dust if it is there.  And we are talking energy here, not vector math.  A big part of the focus needs to be on energy and the energy dynamics.

I can suggest some simple tests for you that I alluded to in an earlier posting and the gained knowledge can then be applied to the Newman motor, but it is all up to you, it's your project.

SS

hi SS, yes, i understand, we are trying to fallow the foot steps of Newman, to understand why and what he did, with that come a lot of his theory, so we discuss that here too,

however if we are not aware ( from the theory) what we need to look for then we will walk right past it i'm sure of that, because if we are doing something "out of the norm" but still falls in the knows physics ( and i do beleave this to be the case) then we must walk slow.

my current do do list has alot of the semmular things your stating in your past posts. Unfortunately i was hoping to have the other coil here by now, as it is the one i want to take more notes on in the same thinking you have.

the current coil is not as accurate, however that is ok, and its still doing everything we need it to... learn us...

so here are just a few things on my list of to do's , not in any order..

Code: [Select]

1. check inductive reactance of coil.
2. determine the light speed of current using inductance reactance. ( 70%)
3. determine self resonant frequency for operation.
4. Measure time it takes for current to get through the wire, might not be wire length.
5. check parall wire induction.
6. Self Resonant is typically the order of the armature RPM. ( research more)
7. calculate the SFR (118hz @ 7000h) = ?
8. Florescent tubes are placed in series across the commutator. ( motor)
9. check capacitance reactance of the coil. 
10. Series SRF to ground!!!! test this.
11. calculate the magnetic moment. (Magnet is .5T in hte center.)
12. Get better measurement on inductance. & capacitance.
13. Use the calculations in the txt file on our coil.
14. calculate SFR with different caps across the coil leads to determine inductance, and SFR more accurately.
15. go over the information SS posted to do.
16. check 1-50mhz impedance curve.


again, i rather do this with the final coil. but we can do it here, i just rather not do it 2x...

also there is 2 things to test here, motor operation, and generator operation.

right now I'm interested in the motor operation. this is why i was stating that the other type of coil would be better for this testing...

so the current coil seems to be best for RF operation, and it would be.

~Russ

PS. i'm currently updating my DOC. please wait for it , then read it so its more clear to you why and what. and honestly, if you haven't read the book, very carefully. then the DOC wont make as much scene to you. and it seems that you will be very helpful in this progress if you can wrap your head around Newmans theory as well as help with the bench testing. this is so that you can see what we are looking for. thanks for all the input so far. 

@SS
firstly, I think we all have a respect for your knowledge and logical approach.
But the problem for me is;
I know if you put a mind to it you could use that knowledge to show how wrong Newman was...
especially when you are not wanting to understand this from his point of view. you don't get the Newman pixie dust..
In your heart of hearts would you like to see a Newman motor fail or a success?

If you want to prove him right then understand you will loose your cast iron understandings that you hold, and work at also proving your self wrong. can you do this?

Or you could set up tests in your mind that shows he cant be right and we can confirm your tests just as you want to show.

We are working to prove the impossible as possible are you?
If you don't believe he could have been right then your wasting your time, spare yourself the hassle because we are going to frustrate you.
and your time could be better spent. but whilst you have any doubt give it your all and at least you can be honest with yourself.

I think you are a real asset and agree testing will give us the real information. Don't hold back and submit the test you think are relevant to how Newman believed this works, not of how you believe this works though...read his book, put your mind in his then speak the truth as you see it...no half measures...
with the utmost regards
sonnet

Russ,

In your to-do list you have a lot of stuff about characterizing the coil but nothing about testing the motor.  And I am suggesting to you that you do some basic tests on a coil with current flowing through it where you them move a magnet near the coil so that you understand all of the energy dynamics of the reactions before you test the motor.  If you want to go there one day let me know.

SS

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 7th, 2018, 03:03 PM

Russ,

In your to-do list you have a lot of stuff about characterizing the coil but nothing about testing the motor.  And I am suggesting to you that you do some basic tests on a coil with current flowing through it where you them move a magnet near the coil so that you understand all of the energy dynamics of the reactions before you test the motor.  If you want to go there one day let me know.

SS

Right, an ever growing list , and id be happy to add some of those, and i agree we should do those. so if you have a procedure you want to post, ill log it. as well as the other stuff.

dont forget I'm just one guy. lol so this stuff takes Time :)  i grantee nothing, i can only do what i have time for. but the hope is that we get to all of those. 

by the way, there is a bunch of data you should look at in Hastings reports, lots of math and stuff that can be used to test our coil, you should have a look at it if you have not. I think it will help you help us in the right direction.

~Russ 

more supporting evidence for my DOC,

attached is an updated version, i have not edited the first part of my DOC, i will do this at some point, the added supporting evidence is added to the end of this Doc.  page's 30-35

mainly abstracts of stuff that was in the zip i posted of collected data. as well as some that tavote posted. have a look.
~Russ