"How much energy is there in a permanent magnet"?

[BroMikey]

I don't intend to get involved in this thread. BM, the OP, has said in the first post that he's not wanting truth and facts here,

bi

That is not what was said at all. I can even tolerate a lie such as yours.
All I ask is that if you are going to loose your temper and make constant
bad or negative remarks with no real data for experimental evidence to
delete your bad words.

It is understandable that people feel sorry for themselves when they
have no way of forcing a message then begin to loose grip. What I am
asking us all to do is to grow beyond this cause and effect tantrum.

Facts are facts and are relevant to the application or context.

Be more explicit and the post you enter should back up your claim when
you are at the same time calling me a liar. To you it may seem that I have
lied and I may be unaware that I did it.

So please be kind and patient with each other. Each man has the right to
have his "say so" but force and intimidation usage, for instance something
used at the university level, used as a follow up to press the point, will
be corrected.

Such as you are doing right now and either do not care or do not see
what you are doing. Use terminology such as "IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING"
or "it is my belief" when starting a sentence claiming anything.

Be kind not oppressive and forceful.

We need some new fresh horses, ones that point out all the details
from start to finish without using that condescending tone.

If you are out of time and out of breath in bewilderment to get
everyone to see things your way, maybe you are trying to hard.



-----------------------------------------------------

[bistander]

no lies

That is not what was said at all. I can even tolerate a lie such as yours.

I did not lie. I simply stated my opinion. Here is what you said/wrote and then me.

We can not continue on the same path of current energy models listed in
our books, that are as old as 150 years.

the OP, has said in the first post that he's not wanting truth and facts here,

This thread is in favor of
looking at the limitless energy available, not why it is impossible to
even suggest.

just the infinite energy which he knows is there.

Think and say what you will. I'm out of it.

bi

[Allen Burgess]

I took his post to mean "5 watt hours of power every time the electromagnet is fired up".

Making such a magnetic field conventionally I think is obviously not practical, but this doesn't seem to be a place for the conventional and the Tesla pancake style coils show promise.

In either case I am here to learn and discuss, please forgive any mistakes.

@Diplomacy,

That's right! Bistander can't understand that. That power would consolidate into high volt high amp pulse that would sustain the Tesla field for perhaps a second and need to be repeated serially to maintain it. A second look at the equations will reveal a proportion of WH/Sec.

Ampere's force law is Ampere per second to gauss

[aljhoa]

much energy a magnet has whether it be in more than one form.
Forms of electricity or in the form of FLUX.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5pZZJ23rDM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72pjGA-1EuI


Al

[Diplomacy]

@Diplomacy,

That's right! Bistander can't understand that. That power would consolidate into high volt high amp pulse that would sustain the Tesla field for perhaps a second and need to be repeated serially to maintain it.

I think it is counter intuitive to describe it in such a way to a classically trained person and can see how it would cause frustration.

Watt hours are a measure of energy expended over time so when you say "5 watt hours" a classically trained person will think of it in terms of "5 watts for an hour" and be entirely reasonable in doing so.

I think a big part of the suppression of these various technologies has been in sculpting academic language in such a way that makes discourse on the subject difficult; we should all be on the same team, trying to free our people from the tyranny of those who want to keep them as slaves, getting on the same page with terms and definitions is a part of that.

Not trying to be critical, just trying to share what I think could be leading Bistander to be irritated with you; this forum is an amazing place and understanding each other better will make learning go better for all of us.

Back to the topic at hand, I don't think a magnet is actually an energy source at all, rather a lens through which the aether is pinched/twisted, the only "energy" stored in a magnet is whatever latent heat exists within its mass. Energy put into a permanent magnet upon it being made is just biasing the internal structure, once that structure is built it is happy to sit there.

Consider what conditions kill or alter a permanent magnet , a hard blow, heat, a stronger magnetic field, all of these are merely just changing the internal alignment.

These findings are along a similar vein I think:

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-metal-electricity.html

>There's a known rule-breaker among materials, and a new discovery by an international team of scientists adds more evidence to back up the metal's nonconformist reputation. According to a new study led by scientists at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and at the University of California, Berkeley, electrons in vanadium dioxide can conduct electricity without conducting heat.

Somehow a condition is created that allows the flow of one component of energy and not the others, differentiating the aether.

[bistander]

To Gambeir

I got some issues here with this video. What they don't tell you about Left hand and Right hand rules is the history behind those ideas and which have now produced confusion about polarity charges and their direction of flow, and which originated with ideas about whether a positive was ground or a negative was ground. So you have to be aware that a right hand rule can be applied to a negative polarity. The way to determine which is which is to look at the ground. Be aware of this historical fact. Not many places tell you about this historical screw up: Triva I ran in to while examining the rule.

* There is no law which says that the right hand rule is only applied to a positive charge. That only happens to be the way it's applied in our time. Not how it was applied at a previous time.

Now I know that I don't know anything about electronics and electrical theory, but while the theory may be correctly stated, it doesn't actually work that way. Not unless electrical magnetism is different somehow.

How many people have actually taken two magnets and followed along with the ideas presented in the video? I have and it doesn't work. The drawings of the current flows in the video are both flowing the same direction.

Take two magnets with like poles facing upwards, now no matter which way you face them in parallel they repel each other. They don't attract each other. They will only attract if one pole is reversed from the other, and that means facing down and only down and away from the other magnetic field. The drawings being used in this video show both poles in the same direction, this represents two like poles facing the same way.

If you have two like poles the wires repel each other, not attract each other. In the video he claims the wires are attracted to each other.
Am I missing something here? I'd hate to be doing this once more. https://markitgroupmedia.files.wordp.../dunce-cap.png

Hi Gambeir,

Am I missing something here?

Although I do not wish to participate in this thread, you compose a reasonable question which I doubt will be addressed by the OP. So yes, you miss the fact that the magnetic field is perpendicular to the current. So the two parallel wires both carrying current in the same direction do not have magnetic "poles" pointed in the same direction. The magnetic field produced by the current in the wire circles the wire and is convergent meaning the lines of force close on themselves. So it is difficult to identify N and S poles in this case.

I hope that helps. Back to the sidelines.

bi

[Allen Burgess]

Rat Maze

I think it is counter intuitive to describe it in such a way to a classically trained person and can see how it would cause frustration.

Watt hours are a measure of energy expended over time so when you say "5 watt hours" a classically trained person will think of it in terms of "5 watts for an hour" and be entirely reasonable in doing so.

I think a big part of the suppression of these various technologies has been in sculpting academic language in such a way that makes discourse on the subject difficult; we should all be on the same team, trying to free our people from the tyranny of those who want to keep them as slaves, getting on the same page with terms and definitions is a part of that.

Not trying to be critical, just trying to share what I think could be leading Bistander to be irritated with you; this forum is an amazing place and understanding each other better will make learning go better for all of us.

Back to the topic at hand, I don't think a magnet is actually an energy source at all, rather a lens through which the aether is pinched/twisted, the only "energy" stored in a magnet is whatever latent heat exists within its mass. Energy put into a permanent magnet upon it being made is just biasing the internal structure, once that structure is built it is happy to sit there.

Consider what conditions kill or alter a permanent magnet , a hard blow, heat, a stronger magnetic field, all of these are merely just changing the internal alignment.

These findings are along a similar vein I think:

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-metal-electricity.html

>There's a known rule-breaker among materials, and a new discovery by an international team of scientists adds more evidence to back up the metal's nonconformist reputation. According to a new study led by scientists at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and at the University of California, Berkeley, electrons in vanadium dioxide can conduct electricity without conducting heat.

Somehow a condition is created that allows the flow of one component of energy and not the others, differentiating the aether.

@Diplomacy,

I've been out foxing four know it all "Flat Nose Maze Mice" since Easter. Inductance is a limited area like Trigonometry. Current density is current intensity. Ampere worked his equivalency theory out with Gauss, then Maxwell refined it to include current displacement (A.C.) RMS cosine values, simplified by Heaviside; then Biot-Savart plate charge "Charge equals Flux" in capacitors, then Lorentz and the electron in a magnetic field in free space then Einstein.

I challenged these heavey weights first on he Overunity site, then back here on Energetic Forum, not as a nice guy, but to repay them for insulting me over a discharge curve comparison. None of them; bistander, Milehigh Tinselkoala nor Citfta can read or understand the algebraic expressions commonly used in our inductance formulas. They're all completely ignorant in the field of Physics. All these men were Physicists: Oersted, Ampere, Gauss, Maxwell, Heaviside, Biot-Savart, Lorentz, Joseph Henry, Nicola Tesla and Albert Einstein etc. These electronics "Scope Gadgeteers" never signed up for one Physics course between the lot. Physicists have no need for Oscilloscopes.

I set out to make that group of "Thamsanka Wizards" look like a pack of chumps. I have a Milehigh decal painted on my cowling at this time.

[Gambeir]

Hi Gambeir,



Although I do not wish to participate in this thread, you compose a reasonable question which I doubt will be addressed by the OP. So yes, you miss the fact that the magnetic field is perpendicular to the current. So the two parallel wires both carrying current in the same direction do not have magnetic "poles" pointed in the same direction. The magnetic field produced by the current in the wire circles the wire and is convergent meaning the lines of force close on themselves. So it is difficult to identify N and S poles in this case.

I hope that helps. Back to the sidelines.

bi

Yes it does and thanks for explaining that. Obviously this thread is outside of my knowledge and I also have no means to contribute to it, but it seemed to not make sense at the moment, still wouldn't if you hadn't taken a second to instruct me. Once I think about what electromagnetic force should be created by another moving field then it makes sense. Opp's.
I appreciate your reply.

[citfta]

Gambeir,

There is a thread here for open discussion about projects on this forum. It is also sometimes used for electronic discussion and questions. If you want to ask any questions about electronics feel free to ask in that thread. It is for actual technical discussions that would interfere with the focus of other threads.

Carroll

[padova]

Hallo BroMikey

As an addition to this topic I would mention late Mr Howard Johnson and his
work on permanent magnets. Very interesting, at least it was for me.
That's dvd number 4 from series "Enegy from the Vacuum."
Very informative. I saw some parts here and there on the Internet.
There is a book also from him.
Also very interesting man Howard Johnson.

One link: Howard Johnson

[BroMikey]

Hallo BroMikey

As an addition to this topic I would mention late Mr Howard Johnson and his
work on permanent magnets. Very interesting, at least it was for me.
That's dvd number 4 from series "Energy from the Vacuum."
Very informative. I saw some parts here and there on the Internet.
There is a book also from him.
Also very interesting man Howard Johnson.

Hello Padova

Good to point out Howie sure gave the world much to go on as his
work was passed to John bedini and further explored. I heard the magnets
shuffling back and forth on one of Peter L. SSG where he had experimented
with the flipping polarity magnet stacks.

Or making mechanical gates you might call it. Other have also shown a
wide range of magnetic engine work pointing to keys that could be
merged with motor generators.

The energy potential redirected at the Bloch Wall comes from the Aether
I would imagine. A number of magnetic engines prove just how much
energy is available to us. As big as you can build for as much as you
could ever possibly want but practical models must first be developed.

Not everyone has the capacity to develop a practical breakthrough.

Howard died before he finished.

[padova]

In part of the the video I saw, no mention of Aether, it say that is
from inner structure of the magnet. But I don't have all informations.
He worked on that very extensively
and have some patents. Very scientific thing.

[BroMikey]

I was not very complete, let me show you John Bedini's way
of looking at energy in a magnet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYaS9xCeNJE

[BroMikey]

Yet another complete picture. Here is his idea.
Others say the opposite.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw1M3LbzGlY

----------------------------------------------------------

[Allen Burgess]

Ampere's Force law

From Ampere’s law, it can be derived that the field inside a coil of wire is described as: Formula attached below:

Basically Amperes force law; Current in Amps divided into turns per meter of wire equals magnet field strength in Gauss.

3600 Joules per second would generate 1 Tesla of field strength in an inductor of 1 Henry of inductance.

where:
• B = the magnetic field strength at the center, in Tesla (10,000 Gauss = 1 Tesla)
• µo = a constant, the magnetic permeability of free space, 4π×10−7 N·A−2
• k = a constant, the magnetic permeability of the core material. Iron = 5000, Steel = 100, Air = 1.
• N / L = number of turns per length of the core/shaft, expressed in turns per meter
• I = current flowing through the wire, expressed in Amps