1. Nov 9, 2005

### cd27

i hope this isn't in the wrong spot....if it is...could someone move it for me and let me know?
For a while I have been working on an experiment to make a device I call the Psinetic Core (TM). I will give the implications of this device, but not its function, as I am not allowed to state theory or personal opinion in this site.
My Goal:
My goal is to charge a magnetically levitated sphere with static electricity
My Problem:
I do not have the math skills, equipment/money, nor the electronics skills to produce my prototype; though the theory behind it and the electronic laws are nearly flawless.
My Project Calculation/designs:
The first thing to note is that there is going to need to be a metal sphere, approximately 2 inches in radius and 4 inches in diameter (Circumference of 13 Square inches and Area of 13 Square inches). The second thing to know is that there will need to be an outer electromagnet hollow sphere approximately 2 inches thick and with a space of 2 inches in-between the electromagnet and the inner metal sphere. The third thing is that there will be a thick glass covering on the outside of the electromagnet, safely separating a computer chip from the magnetics inside the glass covering.
What I need to know:
1. I need to know how much static electricity is needed to complete engulf the space between the electromagnet and the inner metal sphere.
2. I need to know how much energy is needed to use the electromagnet to levitate the inner sphere. (Exactly what implications will I need to do such levitation? Polarity…someone’s gonna have to explain that…)
3. How thick the glass ahs to be to escape dangers of exposure to electromagnetism inside it.
4. Someone to explain about electricity (Difference in watts, volts, amperes).
5. Does this type of device need a ground? Or does the glass do that for it?
6. Will the glass be effected from electricity/resistant heat-such as melting or cracking?
This could save me years of research and testing, because I would have to do this experiment by myself. I would appreciate it extremely if I could get these questions answered, and perhaps modifications if needed. It is vital to not only my future career but also my own personal work (I’ve been working on a theory for three and a half years). It is absolutely imperative that I find a way for this device to work.
I would include a picture to help illustrate my problems and project, but I work from a high school computer and it blocks image uploading on the computer (unless of course the picture is saved on another site).

also, how much money do you think it would take to make this entire device?

cd

Last edited: Nov 9, 2005
2. Nov 9, 2005

cd

3. Nov 9, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

For some basic background in electricity and electronics, I'd suggest that you spend a little time at Howstuffworks.com in the Electronics section:

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/

http://science.howstuffworks.com/electromagnet.htm

You will be using an electromagnet with some kind of feedback circuit to keep the inner ball levitated. The electromagnet can be placed above the sphere, for example, and you could use optical feedback to tell you when the ball starts moving up or down out of its sweet spot, and modulate the drive to the electromagnet to keep the ball centered. There are toys available from places like the Sharper Image that suspend a metal ball in the air using this technique.

Good luck in your creativity and learning. If this idea of yours doesn't work out, hopefully the next one or the next one after that will. Definitely keep on learning and being (practically) creative. BTW, you should use the "TM" symbol for the adjective that you want to copyright (Psinetic). You aren't supposed to use the (C) symbol until you are issued a copyright by the Patent office. The correct way to write it for now is "Psinetic (TM) Core". Good luck, -Mike-

4. Nov 9, 2005

### cd27

thank you for your help. i do not, however, have anoyone with the experience or time to assist me (that's what stinks about living in a small town). i must do al of this by myself. so i go to forum sites all over the place looking for help.

i will most definately replace teh (c) symbol with the (TM) symbol. this is actually a propetual motion generator, but i'm working with a completely new idea that has never been done before, and i only hope that it works. if it does, it will change physics forever. that's why it is so important that i figure it out.

cd

5. Nov 9, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

But as I mentioned in my post, it's important for you to understand why perpetual motion mechanisms won't work, so that you can move on to working on other, more potentially fruitful ideas. Honestly, you will do much better in the long run if you don't waste time going down paths that have a dead end. There are so many real problems in the world that are waiting for a creative solution, and it's people like you and me and lots of people here on PF that are the ones who can come up with those creative solutions. But the problems have to be real, and have real solutions.

Learn about electronics and physics and experiment with building things. Design and build a magnetic ball levitation circuit like I mentioned, or find some kits that you can put together to learn more about building electromechanical devices. And keep looking at real world problems with a creative eye, and brainstorm potential solutions. If you have creativity, intelligence and drive, you can do some great things. Please don't waste valuable time on perpetual motion. Do a PF search on perpetual motion and do some reading. And then move on.

6. Nov 9, 2005

### cd27

i know natural propetual motion will not work. that's why i'm gonig at it in another manor. i've lots of research, but believe me, you have no idea what is in this patricular field. i may be wrong,you may be correct, or it could be the other way around. but this angle has NEVER been approached before. as for looking ito other things, i am. i look at them all at the same time. it makes for a great passtime :)

cd

7. Nov 9, 2005

### dlgoff

berkeman is absolutely correct.

8. Nov 10, 2005

### cd27

i know. i however, do want to try out this new direction. it hasn't been tried before, and it may be just what we're looking for. the way i see it, everything is possible, if you know where to look.

cd

9. Nov 10, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

Ehh? If I were you, I'd make an effort to learn why you are wrong, not to try to make your idea work. I can grant that you are a pretty smart guy, but thousands of smart guys made the laws of physics what they are. You don't just have to be smarter than the smartest of them, you have to be smarter than all of them put together, if you want to toss physics out the window.

Anyway, if you want us to help you figure out why you are wrong, and help you learn how science really works, we'll help, but we don't feed drug abuse here. Thread locked.