Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[Ufopolitics]

Trying to explain...

In fact I understand perfectly the principles of Figuera device. The only part that I do not see is your proposal for energy recycling in the part G. Actually I was expecting a technical answer to the two main doubts I have about the energy recycling idea:

1. How can an electromagnet " get filled and emptied " of current coming from/to the toroidal part G using just one wire without reversing its polarity? (in my mind this is impossible) This device must be fed with a current always in the same direction to mantain always the same polarity in the electromagnets without reaching a reversal
   
   
2. How can the current stored in the toroid return to the electromagnets (to get recycled) instead of going to the battery which is at zero voltage? (if so that mean a current flowing against voltage)

For clarity of other users I post below an sketch that MM posted in OU dot com forum some months ago.



If someone can solve my two technical doubts please post it. I think that they are two easy questions for anyone who understand its operation.

Hello Hanon1492,

I will try my best to explain the way I see it works...HOWEVER, I have been watching how much you "approve" and "praise" over Lorentz Forces, and the "Entertainment" that has been put out for years related to the two differences in what I see as plain and simple the same exact experiment...:

Einstein proposed the "difference" between :

1-Moving the Magnet In-Out from the Static Coil.

2- Moving Coil In-Out from the Static Magnet.

Which (the way I see this) is the most stupid way to get people confused on such simple experiment...but what it really amazes me is how people believe in this so non sense reasoning for so long.

Both 1 & 2 are EXACTLY the same thing...and the result of course would be the same thing...whether one of the bodies stays static while the second moves...is just a way to "entertain" a confusion based on "relativistic views".

To start with Hendrik Lorentz completely discarded the slightest possibility of a Magnetic Field Polarity Spin AND Magnetic Field Divergence.

So, if You, Hanon1492, agree with Lorentz Forces, it means you agree that magnetic Field does not spin...therefore, You would NEVER, EVER, understand Part G Full Operation.

So, if You really want to understand Part G, for real, you will need to realize Magnetic Fields Polarizations (Poles) are a Spinning Flow.

Sorry, but You can't have both concepts together.

Now I will try with some graphics I made...to explain it (again) since you are asking for anyone who could do it...

[IMG][/IMG]

On above IMG N1 Magnetic Field is at Max Potential (Full Positive, High End connection), say that North spins CW at full potential...while N2 Magnetic Field is at Minimum Potential (retracting) therefore, the prevailing spin would be forced by N1 DIRECTION into N2 Primary Coil, look at N2 Coil Spin arrows, following a flow which returns to the opposite terminal from part G (red returning arrows), which would be sucking this flow and converting it "iso facto" in a Magnetic Field. at the G Toroid Iron Core.

Now, if you look at IMG below, it shows the completely opposite operation (N2 is at MAX):

[IMG][/IMG]

Here N2 is at Max Potential, same CW Spin at full input, but seen from different point of view (OPPOSITE DIRECTION AS N1), forcing the spin on the Retracting N1 (who is still spinning CW but now based on N2 direction) ...and so, returning back to the opposite end to the highest injected positive potential from the Part G Toroidal Iron Core.

There is absolutely no Magnetic Field Polarity reversal here at all, just lower-higher potential influences-Interactions from the same exact polarizations, in this case North Pole.

Another thing...This would work with a South Pole as well...right?...So, if we apply the Lorentz "B Field Theory" where it travels "one way only" from North to South...then Figuera should not work with South...however, it does work as well.

If we all start discussing about current flow directions as being always the same from positive to negative...or viceversa...or believe that magnetic field polarities does not spin...then it is really a waste of time to even attempt to explain how Part G works.

Part G ALONE is a Generator friend...based on exactly the same principle as Figuera's disclosure on his patent, using the same poles, whether South or North in repulsion mode. The only difference is that Part G Spins the two opposed Fields in a continuous Rotational Fashion...while Figuera Primaries does it in a Linear (back and forth) Fashion.

Same principle of moving the opposing (repulsion) virtual fields, and causing an Induced EMF on secondaries but in different displacement geometries.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

On a separate note...

Hello MM,

On a separate note, I am working on my Figuera set up, plus the other two more machines, so, I am very busy to keep posting here!!

I just did post above trying to explain Hanon about part G Operation...

I am going to build first the Figuera with resistors which I got 10Watts 1.5 Ohms...am using a total of 9 resistors as in my previous posted diagram below:

[IMG][/IMG]

So, the total sum of resistors would be 13.5 ohms...And so I am building my primaries based on 23 gauge (awg) wire...which based on the chart you have provided (which is excellent, thank you!!) I got each Primary Coil at around 14.6 ohms EACH.

My Primary Solid Iron Rod Cores are 1 1/4"X 4" and I have two Secondary Cores to test wound with 16 awg wire:

1- First one to test would be the same core size as primaries.

2- Second one to test would be a shorter and much thicker one at 2" thick by 2 1/4 long also wound with 16 gauge.

I am working now on the fiberglass housing and attachments (fasteners) for all of them.

I have not being able to get a Toroid iron core as of now to build Part G...so, I just wanna test the main principle -proof of concept- with my rotary switch.

Question is...Is this resistance values correct for EACH primary winding at 14.6 ohms based on my 9 resistors totaling 13.5 ohms?

Of course I would be checking magnetic spin with B&W CRT (to make sure both are the same polarities), plus Field Expansion-Retractions with color CRT plus Viewing Film....plus needle deflection.


Thanks and regards friend


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

He's back

Hi Ufo,

Interesting theory. Not how I see it working. But interesting. I'll be back later with some comments.

One question for now: Do you imply that no current flows back to the source negative terminal?

Regards,

bi

Hello Hanon1492,

I will try my best to explain the way I see it works...HOWEVER, I have been watching how much you "approve" and "praise" over Lorentz Forces, and the "Entertainment" that has been put out for years related to the two differences in what I see as plain and simple the same exact experiment...:

Einstein proposed the "difference" between :

1-Moving the Magnet In-Out from the Static Coil.

2- Moving Coil In-Out from the Static Magnet.

Which (the way I see this) is the most stupid way to get people confused on such simple experiment...but what it really amazes me is how people believe in this so non sense reasoning for so long.

Both 1 & 2 are EXACTLY the same thing...and the result of course would be the same thing...whether one of the bodies stays static while the second moves...is just a way to "entertain" a confusion based on "relativistic views".

To start with Hendrik Lorentz completely discarded the slightest possibility of a Magnetic Field Polarity Spin AND Magnetic Field Divergence.

So, if You, Hanon1492, agree with Lorentz Forces, it means you agree that magnetic Field does not spin...therefore, You would NEVER, EVER, understand Part G Full Operation.

So, if You really want to understand Part G, for real, you will need to realize Magnetic Fields Polarizations (Poles) are a Spinning Flow.

Sorry, but You can't have both concepts together.

Now I will try with some graphics I made...to explain it (again) since you are asking for anyone who could do it...

[IMG][/IMG]

On above IMG N1 Magnetic Field is at Max Potential (Full Positive, High End connection), say that North spins CW at full potential...while N2 Magnetic Field is at Minimum Potential (retracting) therefore, the prevailing spin would be forced by N1 DIRECTION into N2 Primary Coil, look at N2 Coil Spin arrows, following a flow which returns to the opposite terminal from part G (red returning arrows), which would be sucking this flow and converting it "iso facto" in a Magnetic Field. at the G Toroid Iron Core.

Now, if you look at IMG below, it shows the completely opposite operation (N2 is at MAX):

[IMG][/IMG]

Here N2 is at Max Potential, same CW Spin at full input, but seen from different point of view (OPPOSITE DIRECTION AS N1), forcing the spin on the Retracting N1 (who is still spinning CW but now based on N2 direction) ...and so, returning back to the opposite end to the highest injected positive potential from the Part G Toroidal Iron Core.

There is absolutely no Magnetic Field Polarity reversal here at all, just lower-higher potential influences-Interactions from the same exact polarizations, in this case North Pole.

Another thing...This would work with a South Pole as well...right?...So, if we apply the Lorentz "B Field Theory" where it travels "one way only" from North to South...then Figuera should not work with South...however, it does work as well.

If we all start discussing about current flow directions as being always the same from positive to negative...or viceversa...or believe that magnetic field polarities does not spin...then it is really a waste of time to even attempt to explain how Part G works.

Part G ALONE is a Generator friend...based on exactly the same principle as Figuera's disclosure on his patent, using the same poles, whether South or North in repulsion mode. The only difference is that Part G Spins the two opposed Fields in a continuous Rotational Fashion...while Figuera Primaries does it in a Linear (back and forth) Fashion.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Yes am back....

Hi Ufo,

Interesting theory. Not how I see it working. But interesting. I'll be back later with some comments.

One question for now: Do you imply that no current flows back to the source negative terminal?

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Of course current would also flow to negative terminal.

However, remember we are not allowing fields to ever collapse, therefore, they would never require a full "restart" from zero point input, so, the losses are minimal.

This is just about potential fluctuations taking place at both primaries in unison (but opposed) without collapsing the fields, so, actually we are talking about a higher percentage of the same currents traveling back and forth from primaries to Part G.

Just paraphrasing what is written in 1908 Figuera's Patent..."just a minimal current feed is required -taken from the induced secondaries- to keep the system self running, including the spinning of the small DC Motor..."

So, of course there are losses (or returns to negative)...but minimal compared to the output induced at secondaries.

Besides, remember Figuera uses an "External Power Source" (in this case where the positive-negative signs are) just as a "bait"* to start the machine...so, once machine is fully operational, it gets disconnected from those two terminals...therefore, no currents would flow anywhere to negative, or from positive since there would be absolutely "nada" (nothing) there...empty, vacío, vacuo...

Actually we could add a DPST "Double Pole Single Throw switch" right there at the negative-positive terminals...and write above that switch: "Turn Off (Disconnect) after Machine is fully running".




Regards


Ufopolitics

*Figuera uses exactly that word "cebo, carnada" which translates as "bait".

[hanon1492]

You are the most ignorant person i have ever come across in my life.
the pic you posted was not completed and does not show the self loop but the pic is correct.
lets see how much more defensive you can get you big baby.

and for the recycling, sorry baby that is fact from the horses mouth. so run your mouth some more because it only proves you are a baby and an ignorant ass.

my suggestion, grow up and learn to read between the lines and while your at it try posting something new for a change in stead of the same crap for years getting no where by yourself.

this Bs you always pull is getting really tiresome and i'm really tired of trying to explain things to an 10 year old mind. YOU are the only one that does this except the brain dead on OU, D1 excluded.
i really don't even listen/read to your post any more cuz 1. all you do is ramble. 2. all you do is argue. people like you is what is holding this thread back.

MM

Marathonman,

Thanks for your profound technical answers to my two questions. I see you are really an expert into the part G design.

Again your posts and insults defines more to you than to me. Your education is clearly stated in your post.

Guys, you have in front of you to MM, the man who is always right and do not even admit a good technical question if it does not match his view.

PD: The 1908 does not even mention any internal recycling energy device. It is self looped taking a fraction of the output current and using it to power the small brush motor and the electromagnets. Read below again.

Be aware of those who want to re-write the original patent with his own ideas and design

[hanon1492]

Ufo,

Now it is late but tomorrow I will check your posts more carefully and get back to you with more detail.

By now, I have noted that in your two sketches the current is rotating around the cores first in CW and later in CCW in each electromagnet so there should be a pole reversal some where in an intermediate instant . In this device the current must keep the same direction always to mantain the poles, with more or less intensity but always in the same direction. But tomorrow I will look into it more carefully. By the way I believe in the spin action into magnetism.

Also in each sketch I see both currents in N1and N2 are rotating CW in both or CCW in both. That situation is for poles in attraction: North- South , as per the right hand rule.

Another detail, "cebar" in the original patent is "to prime" : cebar una bomba, prime a pump. It is used as figurative as a way to start a machine. It must no be translated literally.

Anyway thanks for your long explanation and time. I appreciate it.

[bistander]

Hello Bistander,

Of course current would also flow to negative terminal.

However, remember we are not allowing fields to ever collapse, therefore, they would never require a full "restart" from zero point input, so, the losses are minimal.

This is just about potential fluctuations taking place at both primaries in unison (but opposed) without collapsing the fields, so, actually we are talking about a higher percentage of the same currents traveling back and forth from primaries to Part G.

Just paraphrasing what is written in 1908 Figuera's Patent..."just a minimal current feed is required -taken from the induced secondaries- to keep the system self running, including the spinning of the small DC Motor..."

So, of course there are losses (or returns to negative)...but minimal compared to the output induced at secondaries.

Besides, remember Figuera uses an "External Power Source" (in this case where the positive-negative signs are) just as a "bait"* to start the machine...so, once machine is fully operational, it gets disconnected from those two terminals...therefore, no currents would flow anywhere to negative, or from positive since there would be absolutely "nada" (nothing) there...empty, vacío, vacuo...

Actually we could add a DPST "Double Pole Single Throw switch" right there at the negative-positive terminals...and write above that switch: "Turn Off (Disconnect) after Machine is fully running".

Hi Ufo,

I don't think that throwing a switch to disconnect the negative-positive terminals will work out so good for you.

[IMG][/IMG]

Once the external power supply (via the negative-positive terminals in your diagram) is disconnected, the commutator (or 10 position switch) is completely out of the picture. So all that is left are coils on N1 and N2 and the toroid winding connected to those coils with the red lines on your diagram. The direction of the fields in N1 and N2 is as you show with the black arrows but there is no longer any DC bias, so there is a North pole to the left of the gap and a South pole to the right of the gap. But it doesn't matter because very quickly the current will cease. The winding on the toroid becomes essentially a short circuit (just the wire resistance) and zero flux is in the toroid core. The upper half of the winding on the toroid opposes the winding on the bottom half. In other words, the net mmf of the winding is zero so the flux is zero.

You will need to keep an external excitation power supply. Even with that, I have doubts it will function like you think it will. Let's see what hanon or MM come up with.

Regards,

bi

[hanon1492]

So, the total sum of resistors would be 13.5 ohms...And so I am building my primaries based on 23 gauge (awg) wire...which based on the chart you have provided (which is excellent, thank you!!) I got each Primary Coil at around 14.6 ohms EACH.

Question is...Is this resistance values correct for EACH primary winding at 14.6 ohms based on my 9 resistors totaling 13.5 ohms?

You are on the playground. Taking as starting point that the impedance of the coil to be aprox. the resistance of the commutator. But you have to know that the table that you are using gives just the ohmic resistance of the wire. Once that is coiled the inductance take place and you have to compute the inductive reactance (XL = 2*pi*f*L, in ohms) to get the final impedance of the coil

About your explanation of the toroid operation I still see a reversal of current between the moment when current goes from the electromagnet to the toroid (---->) and the moment recycling energy, from the toroid to the electromagnet (<----). Also I do not see how you can disconnect the negative pole of the battery if you still need to feed with some extra current from the positive pole. The continuity must be kept , if not where does the electrons go?. In case of keeping the negative pole of the battery (0 volts) then how the current in the electromagnets (let say at 50 volts for example) will go back to the toroid instead that to the battery at 0 volts. This will just happen if the toroid has in that side a negative voltage to "suck" the current toward it, while having a positive voltage in the opposite side of the toroid to "pump" the current into the other set of electromagnets at the same time.

Sorry but while I can see the toroid regulating the current as a variable reactance device toward each set of electromagnets I can not see it recycling the energy between them. Fill (--->) and Empty (<---) requires a reversal of current using just one wire and therefore a pole reversal is done.

By the way, you have done a very clever choice going for a first test with resistors. Easier to understand, easier to debug and easier to tune it ( an user , who maybe is also around here, at ou dot com forum took the whole resistor from a heater and clamped at some intermediatte points to adjust the required resistance in each step) See his ingenious design: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

Good luck

[hanon1492]

Also it is important to note that Buforn in his latest patent used a second set of secondaries for the excitacion of the machine. No reference again to any internal recycling of the energy. I quote:

Another advantage is that in the sinus of the core of the induced electromagnets we can put another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all purposes you want.

Buforn patents page:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.c...orn-post-1908/

.

[Ufopolitics]

Cebo y Cebar...

Ufo,

Another detail, "cebar" in the original patent is "to prime" : cebar una bomba, prime a pump. It is used as figurative as a way to start a machine. It must no be translated literally.

Hanon,

A fragment from page 5 of Figuera's Patent 1908:

De esta corriente se deriva una pequeńa parte y con ella se excita la máquina convirtiéndola en auto excitadora y se acciona el pequeńo motor que hace girar la escobilla y el conmutador; se retira la corriente extrańa o de cebo y la máquina continua su misión sin necesidad de que le presten ayuda ninguna para suministrarla indefinidamente.

Here I need to go into Spanish to explain your confusion:

Figuera utiliza "Corriente Extrańa" ó "DE CEBO" y no el verbo "CEBAR", el cual traducido al Inglés en su forma regular sería "TO PRIME". Y Yo sé exactamente lo que significa CEBAR una Bomba, ya sea de Gasolina, de Aceite o de Agua...Básicamente se resume en extraerle el vacío a la bomba para llenarlo del líquido empleado.

Figuera utiliza el nombre CEBO ó el sinónimo CARNADA, que en Inglés se traduce como "BAIT" (Bait & Tackle). Resumiendo Figuera utiliza esta Fuente Exterior a modo de CEBO para (literalmente) "PESCAR" o Capturar la Corriente Inducida en los Secundarios hasta que la máquine se auto-excite.

TRANSLATION OF ABOVE POST:

From this current is derived a small portion which is utilized to self excite the machine as to feed the small motor that turns the brush and commutator (understood the commutator to convert AC to DC); Then exterior Source Current or "the Bait" is cut off and machine continues its "mission" without the need from any exterior power source indefinitely...

Figuera uses the Noun "CEBO", and not the verb "CEBAR" which would be "TO PRIME". And I know exactly what "TO PRIME" a Pump means, whether a Gas, Oil or Water Pump...Basically (to prime) is resumed as to take the vacuum or simply air off the pump by replenishing with the utilized fluid.

Figuera uses CEBO or CARNADA which translated to English is "BAIT" (Bait & Tackle) meaning to "literally" FISH the induced currents at Secondaries in order for machine to self excite


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

I don't think that throwing a switch to disconnect the negative-positive terminals will work out so good for you.

Once the external power supply (via the negative-positive terminals in your diagram) is disconnected, the commutator (or 10 position switch) is completely out of the picture. So all that is left are coils on N1 and N2 and the toroid winding connected to those coils with the red lines on your diagram. The direction of the fields in N1 and N2 is as you show with the black arrows but there is no longer any DC bias, so there is a North pole to the left of the gap and a South pole to the right of the gap. But it doesn't matter because very quickly the current will cease. The winding on the toroid becomes essentially a short circuit (just the wire resistance) and zero flux is in the toroid core. The upper half of the winding on the toroid opposes the winding on the bottom half. In other words, the net mmf of the winding is zero so the flux is zero.

You will need to keep an external excitation power supply. Even with that, I have doubts it will function like you think it will. Let's see what hanon or MM come up with.

Regards,

bi

Bistander,


You have missed to read the part where I mentioned that Figuera replaces the External Power Source used as a "BAIT" to "CATCH" the Induced Currents, to then subtract a small part from the Secondaries to make the machine self excited.

Which means that once machine is fully operational, or Generating enough power at Secondaries or Induced Fields, is only when we turn off that switch...from the external source.

Clearly would be understood that in order to disconnect switch from external power source, the secondaries small fraction of currents would be already connected and feeding the minimal losses from friction and resistance plus the small motor.

So, please allow me to re-write the DPST Circuit Switch by a connection to the Second Secondaries or maybe from a Diode Bridge to a Buck Converter or downgrade Transformer from Main Secondaries...problem is -I believe- that in my previous drawings I did not include any secondaries at all...maybe. I did that because it was straight forward about to explain Hanon the specific relation between Part G and Primaries.

Sorry about the confusion of not "painting the secondaries" plus a correct switching circuit may have created.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

Figuera simulation LT-spice XVII

The G part are simulated as in Hanons video https://vimeo.com/178144785
Coupling 0,999. Notice the different mH taps to achieve "sinewave".

The output transformer N,S,y have N,S bucked. Coupling strongest =>1.

Arne

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

By now, I have noted that in your two sketches the current is rotating around the cores first in CW and later in CCW in each electromagnet so there should be a pole reversal some where in an intermediate instant . In this device the current must keep the same direction always to mantain the poles, with more or less intensity but always in the same direction. But tomorrow I will look into it more carefully.

Hanon,

I really do not want to create such a big debate out of my attempt to explain to you how I understand and see this relation between Part G and Primaries work...basically, because I do not have the time...but I would clear some of what you're saying:

A Magnetic Field generated by an electromagnet could increase-decrease strength by increasing-decreasing currents without changing nor reversing its polarity directions-orientation. This is all Figuera is doing and explaining on his patent from 1908.

The way you radically change the polarity direction of an electromagnet's Field is by reversing the Voltage Polarity at its input terminals, and of course by doing this you would be also reversing the current direction.

Remember, and this is -As I believe- the most important part...We are NOT Collapsing the Fields at ANY TIME.

Only IF we collapse the Fields, then we reverse the Voltage Polarity only at that fraction of time when coil is at zero value. This is exactly the main principle of the DC-DC Inductor's Converters

What we are doing here is NOT ALLOWING Collapsing the Fields EVER...BUT INSTEAD we are just "weakening" one Field while the other facing it is gaining in strength, and viceversa and at UNISON...this is it.

By the way I believe in the spin action into magnetism.

It is not only about "believing" in magnetic fields spinning, but conducting enough experiments that would definitively prove to you that it is a fact...and then, to keep experimenting in order to fully understand how this spin effects takes place in different environments and different exposures...I could tell you that every single minute I keep finding new reactions and manifestations from a simple magnetic field spin...

I find Magnetic Fields behavior fascinating...and then we know exactly nothing about them.

Also in each sketch I see both currents in N1and N2 are rotating CW in both or CCW in both. That situation is for poles in attraction: North- South , as per the right hand rule.

You are completely right about your above statement...when two magnetic fields (understanding that both fields have same or at least very similar strengths) are in Attract mode both ALIKE polarities are spinning in the same or just one direction.

It would be understood then that when we have Two LIKE Fields facing each others, say a N-N or S-S (don't really matter which pole) in what we call "Repulsion mode" ...AND BOTH FIELDS are of about the same strength... then both Fields Polarizations are COUNTER-ROTATING.

HOWEVER, when we have "the Figuera Machine scenario" everything changes here related to magnetic Spin of Two LIKE Poles.

See, when we are weakening one Field while strengthening the other Field facing it...a completely different phenomena takes place.

The Stronger Field Spinning Influence predominates over the weaker one

Which simply means that no longer it would be conserved the same properties as when both Fields are of the same strength.

NOW, the fact that the weaker field "adopts" the spin direction from the stronger field does NOT necessarily means it reverses its polarity...It is just being "Highly Influenced" by the higher-stronger hierarchy.

The same, exact phenomena is present whenever we "spatially approach" to then "spatially retract" a magnetic field from an induced coil-core...and it is obvious that as we approach the field to the induced circuit that Field is "becoming stronger" for the effect of the Induction produced at that induced coil. As the opposite action takes place (taking away-retracting field) whenever we pull away the same strength Field from the induced coil is now becoming "weaker" from the Induction procedure "point of view".

Now a fascinating part is that whenever we start pulling away that same field from the induced coil...it starts an incredible reverse spin effect of the electrical flow at that induced coil...and Field never reversed its polarity during all this action-reaction...Lenz discovered this phenomena and converted it into a Law of Magnetism right after Faraday discovery in 1831.

Figuera applied this same exact reasoning by carefully observing how induction takes place in a typical dynamo or generator of his time...without violating -at all- anyone's of Faraday's carefully legally written laws...

...El campo magnético se acerca para luego alejarse de las espiras del inducido...

...Magnetic Field approaches to then get further away from the induced coils...

Anyway thanks for your long explanation and time. I appreciate it.

You are welcome


Regards


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

Ufo,

I do not understand most of the physical principles you use. They are quite different to the ones I use ( right hand rule, continuity between both poles of a battery, flow of current toward the less voltage point..)

In short: Below there are two zoomed details of your sketches. Between the first image and the second image there is pole reversal in each electromagnet because current is flowing in different directions in each sketch whether you like it or not.





Even I continue watching a North-South, or South-North, in each sketch: CW+CW and CCW+CCW.

[bistander]

Ufo,

I do not understand most of the physical principles you use. They are quite different to the ones I use ( right hand rule, continuity between both poles of a battery, flow of current toward the less voltage point..)

In short: Below there are two zoomed details of your sketches. Between the first image and the second image there is pole reversal in each electromagnet because current is flowing in different directions in each sketch whether you like it or not.





Even I continue watching a North-South, or South-North, in each sketch: CW+CW and CCW+CCW.

Hi hanon,

It appears Ufo doesn't actually write or draw exactly what he means and relies on the reader to know more than is shown or told. Case in point: I had the same concern as you so asked him. He said:

Hello Bistander,

Of course current would also flow to negative terminal.

So we (the readers) must know that there are other currents not shown. It does make it difficult to understand.

bi