A few thoughts, btw I have not fully comprehended everything you've said yet but I'll have a crack at it... >From the stationary view point a magnetic dipole would be created only if electron drift tended not to spiral. The magnetic field would be generated by the rotating protons .vs non spiraling electrons.
Ok, so it generates a magnetic field dipole and a force would be on the ball bearings but it would be equal and opposite at each end and so cancel. And any force placed on the shaft would be likewise canceled, for instance if we assume that the shaft has a dipole field which seem plausible the current cutting along the north end of the field would generate the opposite force to that created by the south end. I don't yet follow the retarding metal contact point idea so I can't comment. On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 8:18 AM, William Beaty <bi...@eskimo.com> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, William Beaty wrote: > > One thing about self-excited electric motors of all kinds: they work > > independantly of voltage polarity. > > > WOW! I got it, I got it! > > In a ball bearing motor, if the path of current is spiral, then it creates > a magnetic dipole field on axis with the bearing. If this happens, then a > ball bearing race becomes a Faraday Homopolar motor/generator, with no > field-magnet needed. And regardless of current polarity, the motor would > always produce torque in the same direction (the direction determined by > the spiral.) > > But WHY would the current be spiralling? > > Maybe the motion of the moving metal will bias the path of the amperes? > > On the other hand, if a ball bearing has a micro-layer of lubricant and > corrosion, then it takes time to squeeze out this material as the bearing > rolls forward. Therefore the contact point on the metal is retarded a bit > when compared to an unmoving bearing. At higher RPM, the retarded > position of the contact point would become greater, so torque would > increase with RPM. Also, the metal/metal bond might persist for a bit > before rupturing, also retarding the contact point. > > OK so far, but there could be a problem. If the direction of the slight > spiral path is wrong, when compared to the direction of rotation, then the > motor-effect will be in the wrong direction. The motor won't spin, > instead it will act like a brake. > > I just worked it out with simple right-hand-rule issues. The force is in > the correct direction! It doesn't matter whether it's CW or CCW. As long > as the contact point gets retarded by the corrosion layer, it should > accelerate the rotor. Coooool! > > But that means... a liquid-wetted version would eliminate the squeezed > layer of crap, and it might have zero torque. (Or, perhaps the "tail" of > liquid gallium might provide a more asymmetrical path, and increase the > torque?) ...or if the whole thing was caused by thermal effects and > expanded metal "bumps," the liquid-wetted version should stop working. > > In any case, it should be easy to build a motor by replacing the ball > bearings with perfectly symmetrical slip rings, then welding some > spiral-shaped bars between this bearing and the outer metal tube. Or even > use some strips of sheet copper, insulated with paint, wrapped around the > shaft to make a simple coil between the shaft and the copper pipe. > > EVEN BETTER: if this device is spun faster than its "natural" speed, it > should become a generator and start recharging its battery. (Add some > more RPMs to replace the wattage lost in the slip rings.) If the battery > is replaced by a short, at some RPM threshold the ball bearings should > produce a huge current and a magnetic field. A tiny benchtop Earths-core > simulator! > > > PS > > The moving balls have a vortex-like motion, where the metal is moving much > faster in the center than at the outer edge. If the spiral path of amps > was mostly caused by this vortex, then the entire ball bearing could be > replaced by a pool of liquid mercury, and the motor would still produce > the same torque. But if the spiral path is produced by corrosion layers, > then a pool of liquid mercury would produce zero torque. > > > > That's why they're called "AC/DC" > > motors. Self-excited homopolar generators DON'T put out one polarity for > > CCW and a different polarity for CCW. Instead the polarity depends on > > initial microscopic currents (much like Kelvin Thunderstorm Device with > > microscopic voltage.) > > > > If Marinov's motor runs in the direction of its initial spin, it could > > still be a Homopolar Faraday motor of the self-excited type. If spun > > fast and shorted out, it might even become a Homopolar self-excited > > generator, and produce an enormous current. > > > > > > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > > billb at amasci com http://amasci.com > > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair > > Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci > > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb at amasci com http://amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair > Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci > >
