Yes, but my interest in it here is not as a free energy device, but a test of how magnteic fields are generated by moving charges.
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> wrote: > The HPG (or more recently known as N-Machine or SPG) is a provocative idea > that still defies conventions. I still haven't seen it fully verified to my > satisfaction (even after extensive funding for DePalma in late 80s early > 90s plus two independent evaluations). I think there is something very > profound to learn from its operation, but whether it is a true over unity > device is still an open question. The second evaluator (Stanford Emeritus > Professor) was critical of DePalma's measurements, but said he noticed a > number of anomalous properties outside the current paradigm of electrical > engineering. He basically said it was worthy of more study and was not > disproven. > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 6:32 AM, John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Here we go again... >> >> >> I have strongly argued that according to SR, magnetic fields occur due to >> relative motion between electric charges, maybe also electric fields and an >> observer with a relative motion to the charge/fields. >> >> This view makes a lot of sense because you can even show that all >> magnetic forces are expected distortions of electric fields from motion. >> >> But I do not believe in SR one bit, and there is evidence to the contrary >> for this view of magnetism. >> >> First we may assume that ferromagnetism can be modelled as a lot of tiny >> electromagnets that create a large virtual electromagnet winding. >> >> Of course if in fact the ferromagnetic field is the results of spins, and >> protons on the nucleous then these arguments would be weakened somewhat as >> it would differ greatly in many respects. >> >> Anyway, if we set a homopolar disk into rotation in the direction of the >> ferromagnetic electron motion direction (the direction the electrons would >> move in the coil), then the relative magnetic field the disk sees from >> these electrons would decrease as it begins to match their velocity and the >> disk would see pancaking of protons instead. This would reverse the >> polarity of the radial voltage from the wire both from an electric field >> pancaking view, or from the perspective of magnetic flux lines moving with >> the protons view. >> >> But there would be a tell tail limit, once the electron velocity of the >> magnetic field source is matched (which is glacial in an air core >> electromagnet, but possibly very swift with ferromagnetism), no further >> increase of induction voltage would take place however much the RPM in >> increased, since any movement would lead to an equal enhancement to both >> the electron and proton generated magnetic field. >> >> But additionally, if the rotation direction is reversed, then no voltage >> would have been produced at all if in a stationary magnet the proton is not >> contributing to the field. >> >> The reason is that if the field is relative to the motion of the charges, >> and a stationary magnet relies entirely on electron motion to establish a >> magnetic field, then moving against the electrons motion increases the >> electrons magnetic inductive effect and by equal and opposite increase the >> proton's effect inductive effect to achieve no net effect as I understand >> it. Basically the induction from the protons would cancel the induction >> from the electrons. >> >> I have never heard of a homopolar/unipolar/n-machine generator caring >> which direction it is rotated. >> >> And even if the protons were responsible for some of the magnetic field >> in a stationary magnetic field, then it would still be unlikely that the 2 >> influences are balanced. >> >> Such a variation should have been noted, indeed this would even apply to >> hall effect measurements, where some orientations, positions and polarity >> of applied current would lead to no, or less hall effect being produced >> than seemingly identical equivalent situations. >> >> It is not impossible, but it seems very unlikely that this would have >> gone unnoticed. >> >> If however the magnetic field is created by relative motion of the >> electrons through the wires reference frame, there is no expectation for >> any of these issues or limits since the magnetic field would exist in all >> frames identically, and no magnetic field from the protons in a wire would >> exist no matter what your motion is relative to that wire. >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Because the >> >> > >
