Generating electrical energy using an intermediate reference frame

[Ivan Nikiforov]

How did you find PF?: Yandex Search

Hello! My name is Ivan Nikiforov. I am an engineer in automated control systems. I have a development in the field of electrical engineering. I would like to talk about her on the forum.

 

[berkeman]

Welcome to PF, Ivan.

 

[phinds]

I have a development in the field of electrical engineering. I would like to talk about her on the forum.

Be sure to read the rules. If your idea involves any new theory, it would likely be a problem.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

The name of the development is "Technology for generating electrical energy using an intermediate reference frame."The technology is based on the principle of relativity of simultaneity of A. Einstein's special theory of relativity. I'm sorry, I don't speak English. I use a translator. Could this be an obstacle?

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

The annotation is in the attachment. There may be a mistake in my results. I wanted to talk about it, consult and understand.

 

[phinds]

I did not read the whole articel, but it start off VERY badly by saying

The article presents the theoretical and experimental results of a study aimed at creating a technology for generating electrical energy using an intermediate reference frame.

It is possible that this is do to a translation problem, but changing your frame of reference does NOT produce any physical changes.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

If you move the conductor in a magnetic field, then the Ampere force acts on it, which creates resistance to the primary motor. If you move an external circuit that is not in a magnetic field, the Ampere force does not act on it and therefore there is no resistance to the primary motor. Is that correct?

 

[phinds]

Whether it is correct or not, it has nothing to do with changing reference frames, which is what I was objecting to. You are talking about something completely different.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

I agree that changing the frame of reference does not lead to any physical changes. But the reference frames are in different conditions. The reference frame of the conductor is in a magnetic field, and the reference frame of the external circuit is not in a magnetic field. To obtain an electromotive force, a conductor can be moved in a magnetic field relative to an external circuit, or an external circuit can be moved relative to a conductor in a magnetic field.

 

[phinds]

OK, I went back and gave the article another look. Again, I did not read the whole thing, BUT ... what I did see was that the author has some totally ridiculous statements about "moving reference frames" that has nothing to do with what he is describing. In fact, there is absolutely no need for him to bring in reference frames at all. He should JUST be talking about the relative motion of physical objects.

His lack of understanding about the proper use of "reference frames" makes me concerned in that, I can't help but think, if he got that wrong, what else did he get wrong.

It IS possible that the paper is perfectly fine (or maybe not) if he would just leave out all mentions of reference frames.

 

[berkeman]

Thread is closed for Mentor review...

 

[berkeman]

Thread is moved to the EE forum and reopened provisionally.

The name of the development is "Technology for generating electrical energy using an intermediate reference frame."The technology is based on the principle of relativity of simultaneity of A. Einstein's special theory of relativity. I'm sorry, I don't speak English. I use a translator. Could this be an obstacle?

Welcome to PF.

What is the source of energy that you want to convert with this moving reference frame? I am not able to tell from the document whether it is just another interpretation of a simple mechanical induction generator (but with moving frame references), or if you are trying to imply that there is some magical over-unity way to make an energy conversion. Can you clarify please? Thanks.

 

[phinds]

What is the source of energy that you want to convert with this moving reference frame?

Mike, I'm puzzled by your acceptance of the "moving reference frames" terminology. It should be just moving parts, no?

 

[berkeman]

Mike, I'm puzzled by your acceptance of the "moving reference frames" terminology. It should be just moving parts, no?

Well Reginald, I confess that I have no clue what the OP is on about...

 

[Baluncore]

There is nothing new or unexpected in the arrangement. It can be analysed using simple physics, without discussion of relativity.

The galvanometer is measuring current.
As the external circuit slides in and out, it cuts more or less magnetic field.
That induces a velocity dependent voltage in the external loop.
The voltage causes a current to flow through the galvanometer, limited by circuit resistance.

 

[Tom.G]

Looks to be nonsense to me.

1) The image on the first page shows a magnetic field (B-field) thru the whole of a conducting plate.
2) Fig. 2 on the next page does not indicate a B-field at all.
3) Fig. 2 seems to indicate that the "U" shaped conductor is the part in motion in the B-field.
4) On pg. 2, item 1, at the top of page, states the galvanometer and its connectione are at rest with respect to the B-field.

Unclear:
If the images are accurate, then the description indicates that the "U" shape of fig. 2 is moved in the B-field with sliding contacts to the galvanometer. There appear to be arrowheads where the galvanometer connects to the block.

Conclusion:
The solid block of something conductive in the first figure is being moved in a B-field and the galvanometer is measuring the voltage induced across this block, orthogonal to motion and B-field.

This situation is identical to a DC generator, of which there are many in use around the world.

Have fun with this one!
Tom

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

Mike, I'm puzzled by your acceptance of the "moving reference frames" terminology. It should be just moving parts, no?

In the literary source "Classical Electrodynamics", V. Panovsky, M. Philips, translated from English by V. P. Bykov, edited by S. P. Kapitsa, State Publishing House of Physics and Mathematics-Mathematical Literature, Moscow, 1963, this process is described precisely as a process in reference frames.

 

[phinds]

In the literary source "Classical Electrodynamics", V. Panovsky, M. Philips, translated from English by V. P. Bykov, edited by S. P. Kapitsa, State Publishing House of Physics and Mathematics-Mathematical Literature, Moscow, 1963, this process is described precisely as a process in reference frames.

And does that include "moving reference frames" ? If so, I'd be leery of it.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

What is the source of energy that you want to convert with this moving reference frame?

When an observer moves relative to a magnetic field, he identifies the presence of an electric field. It is proposed to use the energy of an electric field.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

And does that include "moving reference frames" ? If so, I'd be leery of it.

The process of technology is a relativistic process of relativity of simultaneity, which arises from the relative motion of reference frames. The conductor and the magnetic field are in the same frame of reference, and the external circuit is in a different frame of reference. There is a relative motion between these frames of reference.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

It can be analysed using simple physics, without discussion of relativity.

The process of observing an electric field when moving relative to a medium with magnetization is explained only on the basis of the theory of relativity.

 

[phinds]

The process of technology is a relativistic process of relativity of simultaneity, which arises from the relative motion of reference frames. The conductor and the magnetic field are in the same frame of reference, and the external circuit is in a different frame of reference. There is a relative motion between these frames of reference.

I have no idea what the bolded part means but the full description is not the normal way of describing things. "The process of technology" does not in general have anything to do with the relativity of simultaneity. How would you apply the relativity of simultaneity to, say, writing a computer program, or designing a bridge, or any of a million other technological processes?

Objects move. Reference frames can be attached to an object but it is the OBJECT that one normally talks of as moving, not the reference frame even though, yes, the reference frame stays with the moving object. In the reference frame of an object, the object is at rest. That's what it MEANS to have a reference frame attached to an object, and it is part of the concept that all motion is relative and there is no such thing as absolute motion.

Since no object is moving in its own reference frame, to say it is moving HAS to mean that it is moving in the reference frame of another object. Talking about moving reference frames is not helpful. Talk about a moving object and specify the reference frame in which it is seen as moving.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

Looks to be nonsense to me.

1) The image on the first page shows a magnetic field (B-field) thru the whole of a conducting plate.
2) Fig. 2 on the next page does not indicate a B-field at all.

The magnetic field lines are perpendicular to the plane of the sheet, they come out of the magnet

3) Fig. 2 seems to indicate that the "U" shaped conductor is the part in motion in the B-field.

The "U" shaped conductor moves outside the magnetic field

4) On pg. 2, item 1, at the top of page, states the galvanometer and its connectione are at rest with respect to the B-field.

Right. In this model, the galvanometer is transferred to the reference frame of the conductor and, together with it, is fixed in the laboratory. Only the "U" shaped wire moves, which is not in a magnetic field.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

I have no idea what the bolded part means but the full description is not the normal way of describing things. "The process of technology" does not in general have anything to do with the relativity of simultaneity. How would you apply the relativity of simultaneity to, say, writing a computer program, or designing a bridge, or any of a million other technological processes?

Objects move. Reference frames can be attached to an object but it is the OBJECT that one normally talks of as moving, not the reference frame even though, yes, the reference frame stays with the moving object. In the reference frame of an object, the object is at rest. That's what it MEANS to have a reference frame attached to an object, and it is part of the concept that all motion is relative and there is no such thing as absolute motion.

Since no object is moving in its own reference frame, to say it is moving HAS to mean that it is moving in the reference frame of another object. Talking about moving reference frames is not helpful. Talk about a moving object and specify the reference frame in which it is seen as moving.

The physics of the process is described as follows. There are atoms in a conductor around which electrons rotate. When a conductor enters a magnetic field, the rotating electrons become oriented and essentially represent a multitude of circuits with current. Movement relative to the current loop leads to electric polarization. This polarization is observed in a moving frame of reference, while there is no polarization in a stationary frame of reference.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

When the motor L moves, an electromotive force appears. I suggest moving not the L engine, but an external circuit that is not in a magnetic field. In this case, the galvanometer (electrical load) is transferred to the reference frame of the conductor (motor L). In this case, we get the same electromotive force, but the Ampere force does not act on the external circuit, because when it moves, it is not in a magnetic field.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

An electrically neutral current loop in its own reference frame does not have to be neutral in another inertial reference frame. Using the Minskovsky diagram, it is proved that the charge densities are different in different frames of reference, precisely as a consequence of the relativity of simultaneity.

 

[Tom.G]

This diagram in your post #26 does not match the diagrams in your post #5. Please clarify.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

This diagram in your post #26 does not match the diagrams in your post #5. Please clarify.

Post #5 shows a laboratory setup to demonstrate the production of an electromotive force when an external circuit moves, which is not in a magnetic field. Post #26 shows the Minkowski diagram, which proves that there is a difference in charge density in different reference frames.

 

[Tom.G]

My bad, I intended to compare you post #25 to your post #5.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

The installation in post #5 is based on the installation in post #25. The galvanometer has been moved to the reference frame of the L engine and is electrically connected in series (in a circuit break). Instead of an inductor, neodymium magnets are used, the field of which is oriented in the same way. Moving the "U" shaped conductor to #5 is equivalent to moving the external circuit to #25.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

Unfortunately, in the installation of post #5, I cannot measure the energy characteristics, I cannot compare the energy expended on the movement of the "U"-shaped wire and the electrical energy received. To test the hypothesis, I designed a generator, which is currently being manufactured. I hope that it will allow me to measure the energy characteristics. The main question is as follows. My conclusions and results are based on official science, but if they are correct, we have a violation of the law of conservation of energy. Perhaps this is explained by Noether's theorem that the law of conservation of energy is a consequence of the uniformity of time. Since time is not uniform in this process, the conservation law is not fulfilled. Either there is some kind of error in my results. I would like to understand this.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

The attachment contains files that depict the evolution of the design from this drawing to a generator that uses the movement of a system that is not in a magnetic field (this is a pulley and brushes). If the generator shows operability, instead of brushes, you can use the rotation of a liquid conductor in the channel, for example, mercury.

 

[Tom.G]

In post #5, where is the magnetic field and its direction?

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

In #5, the magnetic field is positioned this way

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

This technology has another effect. When the external reference frame moves, an electric current flows in a closed electrical circuit. This current, flowing through a conductor located in a magnetic field, is affected by the Ampere force, which tends to move the conductor in the direction of rotation of the external reference frame. Thus, by rotating a light external frame of reference, we can drag (rotate) a heavy body behind it (the frame of reference of a conductor with a magnetic field). This property can be used in vehicles.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

As the external circuit slides in and out, it cuts more or less magnetic field.

The essential condition of the proposed hypothesis is that the external circuit is not in a magnetic field during its movement. That's the whole point.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

Thread is moved to the EE forum and reopened provisionally.


Welcome to PF.

What is the source of energy that you want to convert with this moving reference frame? I am not able to tell from the document whether it is just another interpretation of a simple mechanical induction generator (but with moving frame references), or if you are trying to imply that there is some magical over-unity way to make an energy conversion. Can you clarify please? Thanks.

An induction generator uses an alternating process ("Induction"), resulting in an electrodynamic field. Such a field allows you to increase the ampere turns and eventually get a higher current or a higher voltage. The proposed design uses a continuous process ("Influenz"), resulting in an electrostatic field. Such a field does not allow to increase the ampere turns, since the linear integral along the closed path is zero. I admit, I spent a lot of time trying to increase the ampere turns until I realized the true nature of the electric field.

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for the opportunity to consider the idea on the forum. It is an incredible event and a great honor for me to communicate with you. Unfortunately, attempts to consider the idea with the Russian scientific community ended in failure. Nobody in Russia is interested in this. No one wanted to even delve into the essence of the issue. I would like to draw the attention of the scientific community to this idea, because if it is true, it has enormous significance for all mankind. I am ready to provide any assistance in its consideration and implementation. Thank you again. Thank you for inventing the Internet and many other useful things that we use.

 

[berkeman]

if it is true, it has enormous significance for all mankind.

Why? Do you think you have a generator topology that has higher efficiency than current generators? Current generators have efficiencies above 90% [1]. Please show us your improved generator topology and compare it to traditional generator designs, and point out why yours is more efficient. Please post the math that shows this increased efficiency. Thank you.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/generator-efficiency

 

[Ivan Nikiforov]

Why? Do you think you have a generator topology that has higher efficiency than current generators? Current generators have efficiencies above 90% [1]. Please show us your improved generator topology and compare it to traditional generator designs, and point out why yours is more efficient. Please post the math that shows this increased efficiency. Thank you.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/generator-efficiency

In existing generators, when the load current flows, an Ampere force appears, which resists the primary engine (turbine, internal combustion engine). The main energy expended by the primary engine is aimed at overcoming the Ampere force. Energy is being converted in accordance with the law of conservation of energy, since the process takes place within a single frame of reference in which time is homogeneous.

In the generator that I propose to consider, the Ampere force does not act on the primary motor, since it drives an external reference frame that is not in a magnetic field and on which the Ampere force does not act. This means that the resistance to the primary motor is represented only by mechanical resistance (bearing friction, air resistance, etc.).

It turns out that such a generator operates with a efficiency greater than 1, due to the fact that the law of conservation of energy is not fulfilled, since time is not uniform during its operation. The process of operation of the generator takes place in two frames of reference for which the relativity of simultaneity takes place. These are the results I get.

Therefore, I ask you to consider the idea together in order to prove or disprove this hypothesis. If the hypothesis is correct, we will get an inexhaustible source of energy. If the hypothesis is incorrect, we will expand the horizons of our knowledge.

 

[berkeman]

It turns out that such a generator operates with a efficiency greater than 1, due to the fact that the law of conservation of energy is not fulfilled, since time is not uniform during its operation.

Yup, I thought that's where you were going with this. We do not discuss pseudoscience or over-unity mechanisms on PF. This thread is done.