Didn't Tesla have a patent based on varying a permanent magnets strength? :) In case it doesn't Jog your memory he has a patent that involves heating a magnet (or iron?) till it loses it's magnetization.
Personally I am sure that Overunity is possible from open magnetic circuits and loose coupling, but that is really a different subject but that is what is behind many FE motor generator configs. On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 11:00 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson < [email protected]> wrote: > Terry, > > Thanks for the SPRAIN update. Very informative. > > As a matter of public disclosure: Years ago I performed thousands of > Finite Element Method Magnetic (FEMM) computer simulations on various > PM configurations for a start-up company which at the time was > actively exploring the matter. (This was not SPRAIN related.) As far > as my own 2-D simulations were concerned no OU was ever discovered > even though some of my simulations appeared to show that OU existed. > In another case I got confused about a certain interpretation > pertaining to "tensor field" forces and I ended up grossly > miscalculating the torque strength. (For a while I really thought I > was on to something huge!) > > The final conclusion that most in the company arrived at was the fact > that the 2D FEMM software I was using was not sophisticated enough to > compensate for certain mathematical anomalies introduced into the > calculations. Certain anomalies seemed to get magnified based on > specific geometries and angles being simulated. Over time tiny little > errors/anomalies have a tendency to accumulate into one very big > error. It was as if thousands of rounding errors accumulated and > falsely ended up giving a huge OU signal where none actually existed. > I learned a lot performing those FEMM simulations. It was also a very > humbling experience. > > Terry, I don't think we ever discussed the following matter off line, > but this is the conclusion I have come to in regards to potential OU > permanent magnet motor configurations. It seems to me that one > theoretical form of PM OU might still have a fighting chance of being > for real IF PM magnetic fields can be influenced or manipulated in > such a manner as to cause a cyclical variability in the magnetic > field's strength. The problem that always seems to crop up, at least > as I see it, is the fact that PM forces are essentially STATIC. > Because magnetic forces are STATAIC there is never any variability (or > asymmetries) that one can manipulate. If a methodology could be > initiated that essentially manipulates a PM's magnetic field's > strength WHERE THE PMS MAGNETIC FIELDS VARY CYCLICALLY IN STRENGTH, I > believe an authentic OU configuration is possible. How strong? I > dunno. > > I suspect this is where gnarly and obtuse discussions pertaining to > harnessing the characteristics of "magnetic viscosity" enter the > discussion. (It's possible Steorn may have been exploring viscosity at > one time.) Some suspect acquiring a better understanding of viscosity, > and learning how to manipulate those magnetic migratory paths IN A > CYCLICAL MANNER might introduce in certain PM configurations > sufficient asymmetries that one could take advantage of. Again, I > dunno. The FEMM software I was using was totally incapable of modeling > viscosity characteristics. > > Thus ended my theoretical research into the matter. Alas, I would have > loved to have continued further explorations on the matter. > > Regards > "Professor" Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > >
