Re: Faraday paradox in non-circular form

"Don Kelly" <dhky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:w5yjk.144568$gc5.44962@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> "Terry L Hewett Sr" <terrylhewettsr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:g6kp7q$b55$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "Don Kelly" <dhky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:A%cjk.36732$nD.18335@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> <snip>
>>
>> First this is not a disk. the images depict a multipole arrangement of 
>> magnets in a loop forming a ring or toroid.
>> Yeah I expect voltage! You don't? Maybe you need to revisit faradays 
>> works in electromagnetic induction? It is a proven fact that by driving
a 
>> magnetic flux field through an induction coil a voltage is produced.
the 
>> problem has till this point been how to do that in a cyclic manner.
> --------------
> Yes- there are two ways this produces a voltage- both come down to flux
in 
> the coil changing with time
> a)Speed voltage- due to fixed flux and coil-flux geometry changing with 
> time.
> b) transformer voltage- due to changing flux.
>
> Obtaining this change in a cyclic manner has been done since Faraday's 
> time and was practical since the mid 1880's. I see nothing in your
device 
> that leads to this (and yes, I know Faraday's Law and a bit more).
>
> My comments still hold and I don't expect voltage.
> ------------
>>

the changing flux field must be 90deg to the coil. the reason is due to
the 
coils flux componant. for a brief moment the flux of the coil and the flux

of the changing field interract.
what we see to date is a workaround for this problem. as the ideal 
conditions would be driving the changing flux field at 90deg through the 
center of the coil. Current technology uses a iron core as a workaround 
effectively creating a flux field in the iron core. It is that which you 
base your opinion. In my mechanism this workaround is not needed. the coil

to field interactions are under ideal conditions.


>>
>>> Now, if you are on the disk with your meter, then, in your world view,

>>> the magnets and disk are stationary as if they were simply lying on a 
>>> table. The rest of the world may be turning but the magnet-disk 
>>> relation****p isn't. There may be some variation in the field in wire 
>>> loops connecting it to the rest of the world which could produce a 
>>> voltage- but it is an inefficient way to do it.
>>
>> Don i respect your opinion and agree that in a disk like configuration 
>> such as a compulsator your simply not going to see these effects. My 
>> mechanism is vastly different from current technology. with the only 
>> exception bieng www.ganid.com
>>
>>
>>> Now your zig and zag scheme with alternate poles (if the conductors
were 
>>> in motion with respect to the magnets could work but again it is
simply 
>>> a flattened out DC machine armature.
>>
>> The magnetic fields of the toroid armature are the conductors and are
in 
>> motion. the drive coils manipulate the strong and weak forces produced
by 
>> the polar arrangement of the toroid armature. that is where it becomes
a 
>> superconductor. 
>> www.terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/images/barmagfieldx3.jpg 
>> www.terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/images/!multipolearrangement.jpg
> -------------
> These statements make no sense at all. They actually betray ignorance of

> the fundamentals involved.
>

Hmm, from your point of understanding i can see that. however don't assume

it betrays ignorance on my part.

> The jpgs are how YOU  imagine that the field of a series of bar magnets 
> would be. However, that is simply not what will occur. All that you
would 
> get would be a longer bar magnet which would have a field distribution
of 
> the same general shape as that of each of the shorter magnets.  It
appears 
> that you did not try to test this. I don't have some bar magnets on hand

> but I do have some of the more practical disc magnets (short bars" . I 
> just put some together to make a longer "bar" and the field is, from a 
> simple test - from one end of the combination to the other. A paper clip

> is attracted to one end or the other but not to the intersections
between 
> magnets as would be the case if your diagram was correct. This is as I 
> expected. The test took about 30 seconds to do. Now if the bars were 
> formed into a toroid, there would be a strong field inside the toroid
but 
> a negligable leakage field outside.   It appears that the barmagnet 
> fieldx3 is a figure of imagination rather than something that you
tested. 
> It also doesn't make sense from a magnetic circuit configuration.
> Based on this - the other diagram doesn't make sense.
>

http://terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/images/!ringofmagnetswithspacers.jpg
http://terrylhewettsr.rackhost.net/images/!centipedalfieldring.jpg

study those images count the flux fields compare that to the physical 
fields. the fieldx3 image was as a comparison not as a actual
configuration 
of the mechanism. I should have clarified that point. the fields are
spaced 
apart to generate a flux field where the opposite fields attract. where
they 
are not permitted to connect via the spacer. I compare this to lensing or 
focusing the fields to optimize the generated flux field.


> Your intentions are good but you really have no idea of magnetic
circuits 
> and devices or any of the fundamental relations involved.

Your assumtion is incorrect.

>
> I do have a fairly strong background in electromagnetic devices and the 
> principles involved - considerably more than what you have -because that

> has been at the core of my professional life.
>
> Don Kelly dhky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> remove the X to answer
> ----------------------------

That would be why i want you to fully understand this mechanism.