Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[Wistiti]

Or mabe the core and coil of a drain pump (like the one Gerard Morin use) may also do the job...

[Wistiti]

low cost build

As always the best way to figure it is by building it.

I think we have to find a way every one , even with low budget, can build it. what about salvaging some discard part? In this vid, he use some MOT for the induced part.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5b1CDuv1R4
MM and Hanon, what you think of it?

Someone have other idea for cheap replication?

[marathonman]

in unison ! Hanon. and yes, nice vid.

j dove;
thank you for your king words. as you can see i am very adamant about the Figuera Device not only from the stand point of getting people off the grid but also the complete intimate details most people are overlooking in the process. i sit and stare at the device for hours upon hours picturing the magnetic fields interacting with each other as the primaries gracefully sweep back and forth in complete unison, oblivious to their complimenting actions of not only supplying the secondary with power but feeding part G every time they recede.

Figuera's magnificent part G that splits a single feed into two from opposing magnetic fields allowing each feed to be varied separately but in complete unison all while feeding the primaries is down right masterful.

Figuera chose straight cores for a reason and i think that should be followed. in the 1914 patent, Buforn shows both ends being utilized in which would be impractical as your device would be way to long to move or store. with that said, i am venturing into the notion of using a toroidal core for the Figuera device with plans to build a 15 to 20 kilowatt device. but for now just stick to straight cores, round or rectangle.
also copy and paste my synopsis on the figuers device, post 873. once you read it a couple of times along with all other wonderful information your mental picture of working device will be much, much clearer.
yes sir, i believe i love this device.

Mm

[j dove]

@MM

Thanks so much for the excellent information you have provided. I very much appreciate all your efforts to bring this out but not only that but to expend the effort to explain it to others . I have read the patents and also William Hoopers pdf that you posted . I also did experiment for function of motional electrical field with canceled B fields . It functions as indicated and was news to me as I knew nothing about it before reading your posts . My question to you is what shape is the cores for your electromagnets ? Are they selonoids ? ie.....recultanglar in shape . As others have posted C shape cores and I feel this incorrect , but then I am not sure with out experiment as maybe this can be made to work . As it would have NN at one end And SS at the other end .What I am asking is what is the best way in which to start construction of the cores . I read you post I core values But didn't get what shape is best . Maybe I missed something . Any info you may be able to give is appreciated. Again thanks for what is already posted as I have read the entire thread from the beginning to end .

Jeff

[hanon1492]

The magic is to create motional induction into a motionless generator. Look how the magnetic lines move back and forth using two north poles and two inducer fields in opposition. Induction by flux cutting the induced wires, not by flux linking the coils as in common transformers. The key is to move the fields back and forth along the induced coil and cut the induced wires.

[marathonman]

?

while that may be true it is not complete, the other part of his discovery was the duel motional Electric fields produced by two opposing magnet fields that can not be shielded by anything. the motional field flows through everything unimpeded.
the Hooper experiment is very important in my opinion as that is exactly what is happening in the Figuera device and if you don't understand Hooper's experiment how do you expect to understand the figuera device???

it's very easy to post stuff that are similar in action as you think but you have no clue how they operate. actually knowing how they operate is an entirely different thing. and trust me Hoopers demo is exactly the same action and function as the figuera device contrary to your own beliefs.
it is the NN phenomenon staring you right smack dab in the face.

Regards,

MM

[hanon1492]

Mario,
I understand the Hooper experiment as you do, but that is not what matters now.

The real discovery of Hooper was that the electric field generated by induction in transformers, E = dB/dt, was different to the electric field generated by induction with movement in generator, E = v*B, the one that he called motional electric field. And here is when it matches Figuera ideas: Figuera did not used induction as in transformers just varying the B field, but he, by varying in opposition two B fields, achieved to move the magnetic lines back and forth to get motional induction and creating flux cutting induction in the induced wires, as in current generators. But in a motionless device, so no cogging was present !!

As I understand in transformer the Lenz effect is shown as an opposed magnetic field which counteract the inducer field. But in generator the Lenz effect is shown by cogging. In case of the Figuera device there is generator induction, by movement, but being static there is no Lenz effect. This is my interpretation

[marathonman]

M.o.n.e.y

Turion;

My demo device i built as prof of concept put out 300 watts with 100 in. it was switched with commutators and made with resistance wire that got hot with prolonged used and was not self sustaining. i sold it to someone on O.U. since that time i figured out part G's functions, then bought some pure iron cores. being so expensive, i could not justify the cost to buy any more. i then was going to get funding by third party but third party backed out suddenly and that leaves me in the position now, struggling.
i am still seeking funding but have had no luck so far. so for now i will just pass on the info i gathered and was passed to me.

my cores are wound and my part G is half completed but the rest will wait until the money situation changes.

MM

[marathonman]

Electron drift velocity

As you can read from the pic below, the flux paths are opposing, left one moving up, while the right one moving down. so that means the electron drift velocity of the left magnet is moving upward but since we are taking the right magnet out simultaneously, the electron drift velocity is reversed in direction supporting the left magnet drift velocity. both induced are in the same direction causing a doubled E fields as opposed to one magnet or electromagnet a lone. thus acting exactly as the Figuera device does in action.
i hope this gives a clearer picture in your mind .

MM

[Mario]

Ok, we seemed to post simultaneously. What I mean is both, the experiment in the book and the NN arrangement in the CF device are very interesting phenomenons, I don't question either, ok? I just think they are not the exact same thing, I may be wrong but it is what I gather. We do not have to waste time about this anymore. I'm more interested in the NN phenomenon anyway…

Mario

[Mario]

And by the way:

The William Hooper table top lecture says, and i quote; the left magnet is given a slow uniform velocity. that velocity is to and from the wire so the right magnet is given an equal velocity opposite of the first.
that means literally, that one is moving in while the second is moving out. how difficult is that to understand?

You wrote "that velocity is to and from the wire". What I read (and quote exactly) is this:

"If the magnet on the left be given a slow uniform velocity V and the one on the right a velocity V' equal and opposite to V, then one will note a deflection of the galvanometer needle…"

Where does it say to and from? There are even two arrows pointing outward in the drawing!
What I gather is that the bars are moved simultaneously away from the wire in the centre, in opposite directions. Is it just me? Anyone else?

Mario

[marathonman]

No ego

I ment no disrespect by it Mario.
i was on another forum an it was completely ruined by new un knowing people and N/S'ers, mostly n/s'ers.
it is just frustrating when you get really far with people then a new people comes to the table with no research at all or very little and ask a bunch of questions that we solved a year ago instead of reading the post. it does get a little frustrating after a few years.
i really did not mean to be disrespectful or sound ego'ish.

what would you like to know? i will answer the best as i can.

MM

[Mario]

You know, one can always correct or explain something without putting a big ego in between.

Ok man, never mind, so very sorry to have wasted your precious time…. I'll go back and play lego now…

Mario

[marathonman]

missed observation

The William Hooper table top lecture says, and i quote; the left magnet is given a slow uniform velocity. that velocity is to and from the wire so the right magnet is given an equal velocity opposite of the first.
that means literally, that one is moving in while the second is moving out. how difficult is that to understand?
that means that while the spin directions are opposing when static, upon movement the induced is in the same direction as the outward magnets spin direction is the opposite from static which was opposing but now compliments each other causing the galvanometer to deflect at twice the potential as one magnet alone.

those pics are the sum of my three plus years of research in the Figuera device and are scientifically correct as the information was pulled from University physics department web site and can not be refuted.

reading something and comprehending what you just read are two different things. what you think you know and what is reality can only be substantiated through research. the previous is just a waste of time and effort.

and if you think for one second that those paralleled magnet fields are not opposing you might want to find an easier hobby, just sayin.

MM

[Mario]

MM,

I believe in what I can verify on the bench But I'm afraid you didn't get my post right?
I'm not arguing what the result of 2 opposing magnets is, and that a NN arrangement is very different to a NS arrangement. I'm also not arguing that the CF device has opposing magnet poles, and that electromagnets can do the same as permanent magnets.
I know that moving a non magnetic bar with 2 opposing magnets glued to each end moved back and forth will result in a current in a coil placed in the middle which is way stronger then if it were a NS arrangement. Done that test.

I was referring to the test from the book you mentioned, are we talking about the same?? Attached is the pic. from the chapter 7 experiment.

Now that we're on the same page, what I meant was:

what is shown in picture I've attached is not what we are talking about, meaning opposed magnets (or electromagnets), one increasing while the other is receding like the CF device. The experiment shows 2 PARALLEL bar magnets (not opposing, parallel) that are moving away from the wire in the middle in opposing directions SIMULTANEOUSLY. My point was that comparing this experiment to what we are talking about regarding the CF device is like comparing apples and oranges.

Btw, where are the pics you attached from?

Mario