Recycled Electromagnetic Induction

[Mako Ruu]

I'm not a physicist, in fact, I have absolutely no training in any related fields what so ever. I didn't even go to College. But in High School, some German guys came and took me out of class and gave me an IQ test, the results of which I was not allowed to know.

However, I've come to invent a few interesting things, and one of them using Faraday's induction laws. I've recycled home electronics for the copper, and used a big iron nail as the former. But I need some stronger magnets (The ones in the electronics were not strong enough), and I haven't found out which way they need to spin in order to induce a current.

I've also invented a number of other things that would probably make me millions of dollars, or get me killed by Big Energy companies. Some of them include Free Energy, space travel, artificial gravity, et cetera, et cetera. (Seriously, I'm not even joking.)

But there are some fields I need a little help in. Little details that I can't eek out, or are just beyond my reach.

My Problem: Which way do the magnets need to spin in order to induce a current?

Question: Does the copper need to be moved in and out of the North and South fields? Or can just a single field induce a current?

The details: I wound the copper around a nail about 500 - 800 times ( I wasn't counting.) It's about 30 SWG copper recycled from an old RC Car. The magnets are neodymium half circle magnets that were in the motors.

Though I do have a really big older circle magnet from a speaker I salvaged. The plans I'm using call for a horseshoe magnet... But I can't find one, and I can't afford to buy one cause I'm unemployed and are having trouble finding work in this little redneck town.

I know knowledge isn't free, but if anyone could help it would be of great appreciation.

 

[JaredJames]

I'm not a physicist, in fact, I have absolutely no training in any related fields what so ever. I didn't even go to College. But in High School, some German guys came and took me out of class and gave me an IQ test, the results of which I was not allowed to know.

I've also invented a number of other things that would probably make me millions of dollars, or get me killed by Big Energy companies. Some of them include Free Energy, space travel, artificial gravity, et cetera, et cetera. (Seriously, I'm not even joking.)

No you haven't invented any of those, your opening line (bolded) is enough for everyone here to know you are obviously missing something somewhere - not to mention the fact the greatest minds on the planet couldn't do it, so the chances of someone who only went as far as high school doing it are slim to none. Not to mention that little thing known as thermodynamics which says free energy is impossible, relativity that says traveling >=c is impossible (I assume that's what you meant by space travel).

Your next point demonstrates this fact:

My Problem: Which way do the magnets need to spin in order to induce a current?

So you've invented all of that awesome stuff above but you don't know this? Not looking good for your claims I'm afraid. The reason being:

It doesn't matter which way the magnets spin, they'll induce current in the wire.

The details: I wound the copper around a nail about 500 - 800 times ( I wasn't counting.) It's about 30 SWG copper recycled from an old RC Car. The magnets are neodymium half circle magnets that were in the motors.

Though I do have a really big older circle magnet from a speaker I salvaged. The plans I'm using call for a horseshoe magnet... But I can't find one, and I can't afford to buy one cause I'm unemployed and are having trouble finding work in this little redneck town.

I know knowledge isn't free, but if anyone could help it would be of great appreciation.

From the very small description you gave there I know exactly which "free energy" device you are referring to. It doesn't work, don't waste your time.

You can't get out more than you put in. Due to losses you can't even get out what you put in. To put it simply: Energy Out = Energy In - Losses.

This discussion won't be accepted at PF and will get the thread locked.

If you get back before the lock is put on this thread, I predict your next post will be telling me something about how I'm ignorant with a rant about how this does work and I shouldn't reply if I have nothing constructive for you. If this is the case, please don't bother.

If you wish to leave out your fairy tales and continue with basics physics questions people will gladly help.

 

[Curl]

Am I allowed to laugh my cock off or is that against the forum rules? Sorry I can't help myself.

No offense Mako Ruu

 

[Mako Ruu]

Actually, you're not wrong. I've thought of that before, and it's not a 'magni-generator' or whatever. I'm not changing the process of induction. I'm using a natural way to spin the magnets, is all. (And then recycles the inducted electricity, like a closed circuit battery.)

And I appreciate your criticism. If people like you didn't exist, people like me would be wrong more than often. But for the record, the plans were for a home made hand crank generator. But they were kind of vague, and only had a one picture of the finished product. Since I didn't have access to a generator I could modify, I was just going to try and make my own just to prove the concept works.

Please continue to criticize my work, I enjoy learning from my mistakes. And I apologize for not being more detailed, my work is not patented, yet. And you smart guys could easily figure out what I'm doing and call it as your own.

One of the main principles I've learned to a T is the Principle of Occam's Razor. Using this I've not invented "free energy" - I've simply found a new way to spin the generator instead of burning coal or wood to boil water which causes steam to spin a turbine..

Just seems a little archaic to me, that's all.

 

[JaredJames]

Actually, you're not wrong. I've thought of that before, and it's not a 'magni-generator' or whatever. I'm not changing the process of induction. I'm using a natural way to spin the magnets, is all. (And then recycles the inducted electricity, like a closed circuit battery.)

Circuit and mechanical resistance means you get out less than you put in - an ever decreasing amount until there isn't enough left to continue operation. Period.

And I appreciate your criticism. If people like you didn't exist, people like me would be wrong more than often.

It's not "more than often" it's always.

But for the record, the plans were for a home made hand crank generator. But they were kind of vague, and only had a one picture of the finished product. Since I didn't have access to a generator I could modify, I was just going to try and make my own just to prove the concept works.

If you really understood what you were doing, you'd realize that the motor you took your magnets from is actually just a generator in reverse - you could spin it manually (hand cranked) and produce current.

Please continue to criticize my work, I enjoy learning from my mistakes. And I apologize for not being more detailed, my work is not patented, yet. And you smart guys could easily figure out what I'm doing and call it as your own.

Trust me, no one on this site will call this their own. It would be PF suicide to associate yourself with perpetual motion claims such as these.

One of the main principles I've learned to a T is the Principle of Occam's Razor. Using this I've not invented "free energy" - I've simply found a new way to spin the generator instead of burning coal or wood to boil water which causes steam to spin a turbine..

Just seems a little archaic to me, that's all.

Time to be a bit harsh me thinks.

Occam's Razor - an approach you've clearly taken with your education, by your own admission.

No matter how you spin the generator, it draws energy from some external source and has losses which make it less than 100% efficient - as such, any energy you feed back in is less than you are getting out - a net loss in other words.

 

[Mako Ruu]

No matter how you spin the generator, it draws energy from some external source and has losses which make it less than 100% efficient - as such, any energy you feed back in is less than you are getting out - a net loss in other words.

I understand this. It doesn't use energy from the generator to spin the turbine.

Do you want me to leave? I've thought of all this already. I've already redesigned it about six times. I appreciate your help, I really do. I just wish I could pick your brain a little more.

As for my education, I won't bore you with a long and dragged out story about how I'm the victim of being a poor inner city kid.

But can I ask one thing, though? Just be honest, like answer honestly without sarcasm.


Wouldn't it be something else if you saw me on TV a year from now with this thing that I'm making? How it would change the world. No more gas or oil needing to be burned. Cars that could drive forever. I think you're a little too textbook, you should be more open minded.

Haven't ALL great inventors in history been ridiculed by people who couldn't accept that the impossible may be possible. Which is why I don't harbor any ill will toward you, and would in fact enjoy your help and welcome your criticism.

ATTACHED FILE: Here's something I was throwing around as a child, I never built one so I don't know if it works. You should be able to decipher it without too much explanation on my part.

 

[jtbell]

Wouldn't it be something else if you saw me on TV a year from now with this thing that I'm making?

If that happens, we'll be the first to congratulate you.