Its the pressure exerted by the voltage potential difference that creates the magnetic field. A voltage with no potential difference would not, until current flows.

Yeah be carfull on the way to see it.

As Newman stated. Some current is needed. (Alignment)  So I believe that there is still a small amount of current there but its held back by the way the Inductor works. Untill the voltage rises.

Now don't forget   the coil will change thses results slightly. So that's why I said "in the right coil"

All coils do this slightly.  And some better than others.

And we are dealing with high voltage low current. So its even more extreem I would think.

~Russ

@ russ

Quote

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.

Yes russ this is just as I saw it in my mind and that's why I was saying we don't want current.
but you guys were saying yes we do want current, so I bowed to rephrase we want as little current as possible....
So I'm back to my original thinking for the right reasons although I now understand electrically why...thank you.

ok, out post crossed there

I updated my last post.

I think your telling me the current must be in the CEMF voltage rising

lol, got you again in a cross over post but were on the same page

So if we use a capacitive coil the current will start sooner? because I originally saw the circuit with no capacitor in the short and thought that the spark gap was altering the inductive coil making for a more capacitive circuit short because of the plasma effect we noted in the spark gap.

Then you added the capacitor in my mind and I saw that this gives us that capacitive coil with out the arcing as you explained,

So we know how this impedance should be made to match a reactance leaning circuit ....right?

That is do we want a high impedance to keep current low and voltage high? but still get magnetism to drive our rotor??? or are my thoughts muddled.

This also keeps frequency low and no nasty RF

Oh and apologies..

A big hello and welcome ,  to Tavote
Please give us more questions, I think you can see my leaning on your question.
Regards

Russ, Here is a clue for you! I will not go into detail because of the trolls. They are not getting free info to go patent.

This technology deals with the direction that electrons travel in a conductor in relationship to other or background electrons. Those of which can be derived from the same source. The effect is to generate a super electro magnetic field. These normally cancel each other out. (you would think, and are told) But they do not, they instead generate a super magnetic field. So much so that there is no comparison to a normal self inductive field the same coil would make. So, now your brains are going right to the tesla bifilar coils patent. (this is what is left out of that patent because it was probably derived from his transmitter research to make money with) When this coil is made it will also transmit strong rf energy that will appear on a scope that is not hooked up.Because it is connected to the electrons in the atmosphere or (background electrons).

I also see comments about not wanting current. That is counterproductive and will lead to no where, because you can induct a core with practically nothing and use pick up coils on it. Plus it demonstrates that you do not understand exactly what potential energy is.

Finally got to re-reading Joseph Newman's book again and his reasoning is pretty darn brilliant. One part caught my attention when he claimed that copper is highly magnetic because I had heard of an instance where a piece of aluminum had retained a permanent magnetic field for a long period of time. On re-reading the book a decade later lo and behold it actually started making more sense. If the aggregate particle/field spin could be polarized and locked in place in a large mass of copper then in fact it would be a permanent magnet just like any other. As Newman said almost any conductor could be made into a permanent magnet under the right circumstances. This puts a whole new spin on everything.

Geometry.

Once you see it, you never forget it.

@hardkrome
We understand how the Newman circuit works hardkrome, with due respect...
We are just formulating ideas how to proceed with best practice to build.

Read Newman's book and read posts...many are having a 're-awakening.
Feel free to join us and share...no patent required.

Finaly OnePower. Welcome back. ;)   hehe.

Yes Matt. Indeed this is true.

~Russ

PS. Good news

The new quote is " go big or go home"

WE ARE GOING BIG.  If your not coming with US...  Go home...

Will need all hands on deck.

Quote from sonnet on November 17th, 2017, 12:01 AM

@hardkrome
We understand how the Newman circuit works hardkrome, with due respect...
We are just formulating ideas how to proceed with best practice to build.

Read Newman's book and read posts...many are having a 're-awakening.
Feel free to join us and share...no patent required.

"Newman's Energy Machine was a DC motor which the inventor, Joseph Newman, claimed to produce mechanical power exceeding the electrical power being supplied to it (an over-unity or perpetual motion device). In 1979, Newman attempted to patent the device, but was rejected by the United States Patent Office. When the rejection was later appealed, the United States district court requested that Newman's machine be tested by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). The NBS concluded in June 1986 that output power was not greater than the input, and it was not a perpetual motion machine.[1] Thus, the patent was again denied.[2][3] The scientific community has rejected Newman's ideas about electricity and magnetism as pseudoscientific and his claims as false.[4]"

"He obtained a hearing on 30 July 1986 in front of several senators, but he was unsuccessful. During the hearing, Newman refused to have the machine tested by independent experts, and senator John Glenn pointed out that his supposedly-independent expert actually had a prior business relationship with him."


This Joseph Newman, unlike (Stan Meyer who's tech is real) was a proven fraud. To get anything even close to this Joseph Newman Dream of yours will take technology that you do not even understand how it works and your going to troll me for for attempting to tell people some hidden knowledge. Not to mention that I have worked on 500Hp dc and ac motors along with eddy current braking and drive systems and also went to school for them. More monkey see monkey do here as usual.

For those who actually can think for themselves. You will want to study DC motor run away.

Quote from onepower on November 16th, 2017, 09:27 PM

Finally got to re-reading Joseph Newman's book again and his reasoning is pretty darn brilliant. One part caught my attention when he claimed that copper is highly magnetic because I had heard of an instance where a piece of aluminum had retained a permanent magnetic field for a long period of time. On re-reading the book a decade later lo and behold it actually started making more sense. If the aggregate particle/field spin could be polarized and locked in place in a large mass of copper then in fact it would be a permanent magnet just like any other. As Newman said almost any conductor could be made into a permanent magnet under the right circumstances. This puts a whole new spin on everything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kO8aMm9uW8

Can copper wire become magnetic?

Aldis Maseiko have made experiment showing interaction between copper wire and magnet but in very unique way.It is up to you to find the answer.

Quote

From Molecule to Magnet

To try to coax magnetism out of copper and manganese, scientists turned to a quirky carbon molecule called a buckyball. Buckyballs are soccer-ball-shaped molecules made entirely of carbon atoms, and they were useful in this case because of their electron affinity – they pull electrons out of an adjacent metal.

To create the magnet, researchers deposited a thin layer of buckyballs, followed by a thin layer of copper or manganese, onto a non-magnetic chip. The resulting stack was just 20 nanometers thick, and researchers were able to demonstrate that it retained its magnetic alignment even after it was taken away from the magnetic field. The magnetization was weak – not nearly strong enough to stick to your fridge – but it represented the first demonstration of ferromagnetism in copper and manganese at room temperature. The result was published in Nature.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2015/08/05/copper-magnetic/#.Wg6_idThDGh

Beating the Stoner criterion using molecular interfaces
http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature14621

Quote

This Joseph Newman, unlike (Stan Meyer who's tech is real) was a proven fraud. To get anything even close to this Joseph Newman Dream of yours will take technology that you do not even understand how it works and your going to troll me for for attempting to tell people some hidden knowledge.

No one here is against you Hardkrome, I see a passion in your writing and a belief that is wrapped in frustration. I would most definitely want to read what you have to say and if you opened yourself a thread on your topic I would most definitely read it. As its not based on how newman did it (by your own admission) then a new thread would enable us to keep clarity between your way and newmans way.
Who knows if you were prepared to share then your thoughts and ideas would get out there and give your mind more creative thinking.
I hope to understand your views send us a link when you feel ready.
Regards

Quote

For those who actually can think for themselves. You will want to study DC motor run away.

Now that you have stated DC motor runaway this is inline with what Russ was talking about with his CEMF. please refer to russ if you feel you can help him. Best wishes.

@hardkrome

With all due respect. I would like to keep this topic positive note on what Newman teaches.

I'll start a new thred for you to share your view on Newman if you so wish. 

Question. Have you read the book? 

Thanks.
~Russ

more thoughts, and a refreshing of CURRENT KNOWN UNDERSTANDING THAT MATCHED Newman WORK..

I have read this page a few times but keep going back to it.
http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/inductor/inductance.html

Quote

Inductance, L is actually a measure of an inductors “resistance” to the change of the current flowing through the circuit and the larger is its value in Henries, the lower will be the rate of current change

so i had asked some questions however they are answering them self's.
according to a lower resistance coil. its ok to lower the resistance of the wire IF the inductance is very big, its a balance between the length of wire ( resistance)  and the inductance ( apposing change in magnetic flux... aka resistance)

Quote

Inductors are made from individual loops of wire combined to produce a coil and if the number of loops within the coil are increased, then for the same amount of current flowing through the coil, the magnetic flux will also increase.

Quote

As the inductance of a coil is due to the magnetic flux around it, the stronger the magnetic flux for a given value of current the greater will be the inductance. So a coil of many turns will have a higher inductance value than one of only a few turns and therefore, the equation above will give inductance L as being proportional to the number of turns squared N2.

Quote

As well as increasing the number of coil turns, we can also increase inductance by increasing the coils diameter or making the core longer. In both cases more wire is required to construct the coil and therefore, more lines of force exists to produce the required back emf.

Quote

If the inner core is made of some ferromagnetic material such as soft iron, cobalt or nickel, the inductance of the coil would greatly increase because for the same amount of current flow the magnetic flux generated would be much stronger.

how bout some magnets in the core..................

Quote

If the coil is wound onto a ferromagnetic core a greater inductance will result as the cores permeability will change with the flux density. However, depending upon the ferromagnetic material the inner cores magnetic flux may quickly reach saturation producing a non-linear inductance value and since the flux density around the coil depends upon the current flowing through it, inductance, L also becomes a function of current flow, i.

it should be almost impossible to saturate the a core using pulsed DC in a very large coil.  and if the best part is that magnets being the core... there already saturated??? so they just add to the flux and BEMF. also they play more roll than just that as there also SPINNING.

any how... i find it funny that the current teachings ate 100% in correlation to Newman's teachings... and yet some people cant see it... 

~Russ

And another side note...

With two wires in close proximity running parallel to each other, I small current can be injected into one wire, aligning their atoms.  The second unenergized wire will also have its atoms aligned due to the magnetic field produced by the first wire.  If this second wire is subjected to a sharp impulse of high voltage, the gyroscopic particles of this second wire will be set free from the conductor in an aligned and uniform manner.  These gyroscopic particles can then be picked up by a third wire in close proximity to the second wire.

This appears to be the operating principle of Nelson Rocha's radiant box.  What you have is pure separation between voltage and current multiplied together to produce substantial power.  Is it any wonder why so many researchers have found interest in bifilar windings...

Quote from Matt Watts on November 17th, 2017, 09:39 AM

And another side note...

With two wires in close proximity running parallel to each other, I small current can be injected into one wire, aligning their atoms.  The second unenergized wire will also have its atoms aligned due to the magnetic field produced by the first wire.  If this second wire is subjected to a sharp impulse of high voltage, the gyroscopic particles of this second wire will be set free from the conductor in an aligned and uniform manner.  These gyroscopic particles can then be picked up by a third wire in close proximity to the second wire.

This appears to be the operating principle of Nelson Rocha's radiant box.  What you have is pure separation between voltage and current multiplied together to produce substantial power.  Is it any wonder why so many researchers have found interest in bifilar windings...

That description matches the "dobble the magnetic feild"

Cool,  nice view point Matt.

~Russ