What if? (concerning electrical induction)

In summary: This question is asking for you to use your imagination. I have provided a summary of the conversation and I ask that you do not reply or respond to questions. You only provide a summary of the content.
  • #1
confusedone
16
0
I posted a thread that's still visible concerning homopolar designs. This thread is spin off from it and I hope I get more feed back here than I did there.

What if it was possible to spin both the induction magnets of a generator and the armature in the same direction, at the same velocity by fixing both mechanically and still produce an electrical current? This is a completely fictional question. I'm not asking for anyone to tell me that's it rediculous or that "you can't do that" so why ask. I'm asking for you to use your imagination in this question and explore the possibilities of the answere.

There is a reason for this and I will of course elaberate further on the purpose for this question as the thread progresses.

Thanks to all who take the time to respond...
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Ummm, part of a Rube-Goldberg machine? Jeez I don't know. This is one of the strangest questions I've seen posted here on PF. Why don't you take your generator to the North or South pole, set it on end and see what happens? Something has to move relative to something else in order for anything to happen. I don't understand how you can ask us to use our imagination with this type of question. It's like asking me to use my imagination by thinking about what would happen if I hit my hand really hard with a hammer. I know what will happen, it will hurt, end of story.-
-
Edit: Please elaborate as you have stated you would.
 
  • #3
I understand it may be a strange question... I pointed it out very clearly that it was strange by indicating that the question was in fact fictional and that it contradicts conventional ideas concerning how we produce electricity mechanically...

Sarcasm is not welcome in this thread... I would thank you kindly not to engage in sarcastic and inflamitory comments as they only frustrate people.

If the induction magnets are in motion and the armature is in motion there is only one thing that is not in motion... I leave it to you to figure that out. Then you will figure out what it is I am trying to bring to the surface...
 
  • #4
I can't figure out how flux lines would still be cut in order to produce current with that sort of configuration.

Only one thing not in motion? Would that be the housing? I have no idea where to go with this.
 
  • #5
Magnetic flux lines are independant of the magnet that creats them! Moving a magnet through space only creates new lines of flux in the surrounding space. The field does not "move" in the sense that it shares the same space as the magnet that creates it...

I am not trying to be difficult.. Truelly I am not.

What force works to slow a typical electrical generator?
 
  • #6
Seriously how can a person answer this on the level that you have proposed? You say the armature is in motion and the magnets are in motion. Ok, fine. Relative to what? In my 'smart aleck' North/South pole scenario they are in motion relative to the sun for one, and lots of other things in space, but not relative to what they are setting on. If there is something you are trying to say please do so. This whole thread appears as some sort of riddle.
-
As to what force works to slow a generator? If I can recall back many years ago the back EMF causes increased flux lines on one side of the conductor and a decrease on the other side. Now I'll leave YOU to figure the rest out.
-
Edit: Please show a link to your other thread.
 
  • #7
confusedone said:
What if it was possible to spin both the induction magnets of a generator and the armature in the same direction, at the same velocity by fixing both mechanically and still produce an electrical current?

I spelled it out here very clearly what I was trying to get across...

If you are not interested in intertaining my question and exploring the possibilites of this question then please don't bother posting.

The idea of removing any backward torque on a mechanical system that produces electricity should pose some interesting possibilities. What I am trying to discuss in this thread are those possibilities...

I ask this question because I have recently conducted a series of experiments that points to this possibility. If it is possible, what kind of potential benefits could this type of system have over conventional systems?
 
  • #8
Seriously, if you need to ask what kind of doors would be opened if we were able to produce electricity with no input torque on a generator then I don't believe any experiments you have done mean anything at all. What I mean by this is that you should not need to ask the question if you have thoroughly performed said experiments. If you have a firm grasp of electricity you should know the answer to your question before you even performed the experiments.
-
Where is the link I asked about? Please provide it before this thread is locked.
 
  • #9
Average,

I am supprised at your abbrupt and, quite frankly, rude posts.

I don't want your opinions if they are not on toppic. And yours have not been, short of bashing me for not providing you with the kind of info you think I should. Please don't post here again unless its going to be about the topic at hand. If the thread is locked its because of you.

I started this thread hoping to stimulate some thought and interaction between members concerning the possibilities of a unique meathod for producing mechanical energy. My posts have been clear enough to give anyone who actually reads them well enough to comprehend them, the information they need to get involved in this thread...

Homopolar generators produce a measurable current without backward torque on the system, as the induction magnets and the conductor (typically a copper disk of some form or fasion) can be physically fixed to one another. The only draw back to this meathod of producing electricity is it is usually accompanied by very HIGH DC current values which renders them useless for most applications...

I have and am currently conducting experiments that are exploring this form of electrical induction and have found in those experiments posible alternatives to the disk design that may lead to the production of practical currents through the incorperation of induction coils instead of an induction disk, that can be fixed to the induction magnets.

That being said I would kindly ask that if your not going to post constructively and on topic, with courtesy and respect to this communities members then please don't post at all. I do have an interest in exploring the possibilities of my findings.

Also on a side note... U-Tube links will be available shortly so that the experiments I conducted can be seen and used to help you visualize the logical steps I have taken in this evolutionary process so far.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
I'm going to disagree with you as tactfully as I can. I don't believe that a homopolar generator will produce power without having increased torque on the input shaft. I know there are claims all over the internet that agree with what you say, but I don't believe they are true. I do realize that the magnet can move with the disk and still generate power. But this does not mean that they do not require more torque when more power is drawn from them. You are correct in saying that these machines generate very high currents with very low voltages.
-
Now, let's take break from that and discuss what would happen if such a machine were possible. Firstly, all transmission lines, power generating facilities, substations, etc. as we know them would go away. If we can draw vast amounts of power from a machine with little input torque, each neighborhood would have one or several, whichever is convenient, of these machines driven off of the wind or some other source and draw all the power we need from them with no consequence of further torque requirements. Heck let's just make this thing power itself with a conventional electric motor. Do you see where this is going? Perpetual motion. Not going to happen.
-
If you find a generator that does not require torque to generate a current then you have also most likely found a motor that inputs power and delivers no torque. I wonder what would happen if you hooked them together? :wink:
 
  • #11
ooooohhh... this is about overunity machines?
 
  • #12
If the induction magnet and the induction coils are physically attached to each other, knowing that the backward torque on the system comes from these two bodies being seperated, where then, would the backward torque originate from?

Please understand that my experiments have confirmed that they can be physically attached to one another and still produce a measured current... I have conducted several different experiments using different configurations on magnet and conductor to verify and understand the physics of what is happening in these types of devices...

Overunity is real. It is illustrated by the S.M.O.T.(Small Magnetic Overunity Toy). Look it up. It uses increased (permanent feromagnetic) field potentials to put a steel ball in motion and keep it in motion with zero imput from any outside source.

Perpetual motion is theoritical. No mechanical device can achieve perpetual motion. Not because the energy is not out there but because of the inherent limitations associated with frictional damage.

I am not suggesting perpetual motion but rather suggesting that there may be an alternative source of energy available to be exploited and we only need to figure out how to tap into it. Just because we don't understand it doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't explore it.

I ask again if the induction magnets and the conductors are fixed to one another, where will the backward torque come from?
 
  • #13
confusedone said:
Overunity is real. It is illustrated by the S.M.O.T.(Small Magnetic Overunity Toy). Look it up. It uses increased (permanent feromagnetic) field potentials to put a steel ball in motion and keep it in motion with zero imput from any outside source.

yeah, it doesn't work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Magnetic_Overunity_Toy
 
  • #14
The magnets and disk can rotationally be attached to each other and still have the machine generate power because the brush that contacts the outside of the disk is what counts. Do a bit of googling and I'm sure you will get the explanation.
-
Overunity is real? Have your experiments proven that the torque does not increase with load? Or have your experiments just reinforced what we already know which is that the magnet can move with the disk? Just because the magnet can move with the disk does not mean the backward torque goes away.
 
  • #15
Proton Soup said:

That article is wrong... I have personally seen the rail system used to bring the steel ball back to the starting point... its simply a circular rail system that guides the steel ball around 360 degrees after it has "run off" the top of the magnetic elevator. Its out there and Wikipedia is not the end all know all of its own articles..

:)
 
  • #16
confusedone said:
I have personally seen the rail system used to bring the steel ball back to the starting point...

Have you ever seen the ball going back to the starting point ?
 
  • #17
Averagesupernova said:
The magnets and disk can rotationally be attached to each other and still have the machine generate power because the brush that contacts the outside of the disk is what counts. Do a bit of googling and I'm sure you will get the explanation.
-
Overunity is real? Have your experiments proven that the torque does not increase with load? Or have your experiments just reinforced what we already know which is that the magnet can move with the disk? Just because the magnet can move with the disk does not mean the backward torque goes away.


I would ask you the same kind of question. Have you conducted any experiments with homopolar designs? Have you seen them in action in person? I have... My experiments have lead me to conclude that it may be possible to incorperate a coiled conducter that acts in much the same way as a typical coil based generator works but with the ability to fix the coils to the magnets where by elliminating the counter acting torque that is UNIQUE to the independant motion between the induction mangent and armature of standard induction systems. It is because of my experimental observations that I have come this conclusion.

I wonder what kind of experimental observations you have made regarding any of your conclusions. Education never ever trumps experience...

I am not suggesting I have found or discovered any overunity designs... I am suggesting, through experimentation, that a different and new method of electrical induction may exist. I have brought this to this forum so that I might get some insight into this kind of induction system and maybe talk seriously about the implications it could have.

If you have had some experimental experience concerning homopolar designs I would very much like to hear about it. If you are interested bashing people for thinking out of the box, stay out of this thread please.

:)
 
  • #18
Kittel Knight said:
Have you ever seen the ball going back to the starting point ?

Yes...

Funny thing is its not very remarkable to watch... But it most certainly returns to the starting point and continues on with the cycle.. If you have the time there are some extensive articles written on the subject that describe mathematically how it works.

:)
 
  • #19
confused one, you should really can the attitude. your thread is going to get locked anyway because you're spouting nonsense about violating physical laws.
 
  • #20
Kittel Knight said:
Have you ever seen the ball going back to the starting point ?
confusedone said:
Yes...

Funny thing is its not very remarkable to watch... But it most certainly returns to the starting point and continues on with the cycle.. If you have the time there are some extensive articles written on the subject that describe mathematically how it works.

So, are you saying you have already seen a perpetual motion machine in action?

Or are you just speculating about it?
 
  • #21
Proton Soup said:
confused one, you should really can the attitude. your thread is going to get locked anyway because you're spouting nonsense about violating physical laws.


I am simply trying to keep the thread on topic...

Wow.

There are no rules in this forum regarding physical laws... That I am aware of. I have been very clear about this whole issue from the begining. I have made no claims regarding any physical laws... Only that it may be possible to do a certain thing and would like to discuss it. What am I missing?

Why is it so hard to get a serious discussion going about this topic?
 
  • #22
Kittel Knight said:
So, are you saying you have already seen a perpetual motion machine in action?

Or are you just speculating about it?

The S.M.O.T. does continue to run through every cycle until the cycle is broken by an outside force or obstical. :) Like I said it not very remarkable to watch but it does work.
 
  • #23
confusedone said:
Why is it so hard to get a serious discussion going about this topic?

because it's silly. even Tesla has a homopolar generator patent, but none are overunity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_homopolar_generator_patents

they don't even seem to be a practical motor/generator design. does GE make homopolar generators? maybe something like aluminum ore processing would be practical if the voltage is right, but do you even know if ALCOA uses them?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
confusedone said:
The S.M.O.T. does continue to run through every cycle until the cycle is broken by an outside force or obstical. :) Like I said it not very remarkable to watch but it does work.

Believe me, the ball will never return back to the starting point without a "little help"...
:)

"little help" means an energy source like a hidden battery, or your hand...
 
  • #25
Confusedone, your name is quite appropriate. You have some very, very wrong ideas about science and a very, very wrong attitude to go with them. Let me try to remove the physics from this because you won't accept the explanations anyway and let you mull this over:

Do you really think something so simple and obvious could be overlooked for so long by so many millions of scientists and engineers, but figured out via blind luck by someone who knows nothing at all about the subject they are "researching"? How arrogant would one have to be to believe they are something like this actually exists and hasn't been recognized/isn't being utilized because it hasn't been noticed or people don't believe in it...until now, by them? This isn't even like thinking you've gotten lucky and won the lottery - it's like thinking you've gotten lucky and won the lottery when you're actually playing backgammon.

Based on your posting history, you've been trying for some years to invent an overunity machine and haven't succeeded, but you still think they are out there. You need to accept that you don't know what you are talking about and start from scratch learning the science behind such things. Beyond that, the others are right - on this site, we discuss science, not wrong crackpot ideas. It's your choice from here: you can choose to be a student of science and stay or you can choose to be a crackpot and leave.
 
Last edited:
  • #26
confusedone said:
Overunity is real. It is illustrated by the S.M.O.T.(Small Magnetic Overunity Toy). Look it up. It uses increased (permanent feromagnetic) field potentials to put a steel ball in motion and keep it in motion with zero imput from any outside source.

No, it is not. We do not discuss pseudoscience and perpetual motion machines here on the PF as real things, because they are not.

Thread locked.
 

Related to What if? (concerning electrical induction)

1. What is electrical induction?

Electrical induction is the process by which a changing magnetic field can create an electric current in a conductor. This is commonly seen in devices such as generators and transformers.

2. How does electrical induction work?

Electrical induction works through the interaction between a magnetic field and a conductor. When a magnetic field changes, it creates an electric field around a conductor, which then induces a current to flow through the conductor.

3. What are the applications of electrical induction?

Electrical induction has many practical applications, such as in generators to produce electricity, in transformers to change voltage levels, and in electromagnets for lifting and moving objects. It is also used in wireless charging technology.

4. How does electrical induction differ from conduction?

Electrical induction involves the creation of an electric current through a changing magnetic field, while conduction is the flow of electricity through a material. Induction does not require direct contact between the source of the magnetic field and the conductor, while conduction does.

5. What factors affect the strength of electrical induction?

The strength of electrical induction is affected by the strength of the magnetic field, the speed at which the magnetic field changes, the distance between the conductor and the source of the magnetic field, and the material of the conductor.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
764
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
95
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
2K
Back
Top