Horace Heffner wrote:
However, there will still be losses due to core and magnet heating, even
if no power is drawn from the coils. Further, as soon as the coils draw
power, the motion of shield is retarded because the energy from opening
the flux hole is less.
The so-called flux-gate is an old concept which has never come close to
*replicated* OU in over 100 years of trying. There are hints and
glimpses, but that is all. In effect, it can be analogized to a rotating
transformer.
However, any common solid state transformer will do better (99%+).
Here is an older patent, '75 which is functionally identical to the
Harry's present thinking, and it cites even older patents:
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin.htm
There are some patents involving flux switching going back to the
previous century. Mark Goldes has mentioned that the Gary patent:
http://www.linux-host.org/energy/tgarymo.htm
has pretty good historical verification, but AFAIK, no one has ever
replicated it in modern times.
AS "logical" and enticing as it may sound, my advice to Harry is: don't
waste your time with this one, unless you can independently find a
natural asymmetry.
It has always seemed alluring that the immense lifting power of a PM
"should" be able to be switched or gated somehow, and that flux would
substitute for a lossy electromagnet. Steorn is only the latest victim
of this false hope.
I believe that Horace has given the correct, or partially correct
rationale, for why this concept is doomed - the motion of the shield
will always be retarded by the same forces which would, in theory,
provide the hoped-for gain or anomaly. No free lunch there.
Here is a crude way of stating the underlying logical problem: Flux
"lines" provide the (metaphorical) power source, yet flux lines will
ALWAYS "jump" out of any preferred (ferromagnetic) pathway like iron,
into surrounding space, if the only alternative is to provide more
energy then they can possess thermodynamically.
To make the thing work - you must find some natural asymmetry. There are
few in magnetism, alone. There are some small asymmetries in chemistry.
There is the possibility that compound or combinatory systems in which
both chemistry and magnetism are used, for instance, or mechanics and
chemistry (i.e. sonochemistry) are not subject to the same thermodynamic
impediments as the pure system.
BTW there is a technical definition for fluxgate, related to
magnetomerty, which is slightly different than the free-energy usage.
Jones
