http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory: ... ple_device
They claim By aligning two magnetic fields to one side of a flux core, you can deliver 3.5x more units of magnetic force than the electrical input alone could supply.
There must be a slip though as they have not produced a motor driving a generator which drives the motor.
Has anyone else looked at this?
Kirk
Flynn over unity magnet
Moderator: scott
Flynn over unity magnet
Not knowing is not the problem. It is the knowing of what just isn't so.
It is our responsibilities, not ourselves,that we should take seriously.
It is our responsibilities, not ourselves,that we should take seriously.
re: Flynn over unity magnet
Kirk,
I quote from the link:
Does not apply, their is no claim that the design is over unity, just more efficient.
This design IMO is very similar to the Beardon Meg in function. They both can be traced back to the time of vacuum tubes to a transformer called a "saturable reactor" Difference being is the the original used DC wound coils in place of the permanent magnets. The magnetic saturation was used to control the flow of AC current passing through a center third coil.
Thus by replacing the DC electromagnets with permanent you have increased the efficiency! Now are the magnets doing "work" will they soon be degaussed? And on and on!!
Your Oregon neighbor
Ralph
I quote from the link:
Your statement: [ There must be a slip though as they have not produced a motor driving a generator which drives the motor.]A motor built with this technology is at least 3.5 times more efficient than conventional motors, offers excellent torque, and high power to weight ratios. It's not true perpetual motion, because it doesn't violate laws of physics, and can be modelled in industry standard flux software. It does add a new rule that is sure to become a chapter in future electronics textbooks, and to become standard fare in many electric motors.
Does not apply, their is no claim that the design is over unity, just more efficient.
This design IMO is very similar to the Beardon Meg in function. They both can be traced back to the time of vacuum tubes to a transformer called a "saturable reactor" Difference being is the the original used DC wound coils in place of the permanent magnets. The magnetic saturation was used to control the flow of AC current passing through a center third coil.
Thus by replacing the DC electromagnets with permanent you have increased the efficiency! Now are the magnets doing "work" will they soon be degaussed? And on and on!!
Your Oregon neighbor
Ralph
re: Flynn over unity magnet
I think this is an electric version of this device made from a lodestone. It was used to magnetize compass needles, and has been understood since the 1600's. A clever variation on a theme.
http://physics.kenyon.edu/EarlyApparatu ... and44a.JPG
http://physics.kenyon.edu/EarlyApparatu ... and44a.JPG
The Sky is the Limit
re: Flynn over unity magnet
I believe modern motors are in the neighborhood of 70% efficient (lesss than 1 horse) and the bigger ones do better. 3.5 times better than 70% is way over unity.
Not knowing is not the problem. It is the knowing of what just isn't so.
It is our responsibilities, not ourselves,that we should take seriously.
It is our responsibilities, not ourselves,that we should take seriously.
re: Flynn over unity magnet
Kirk,
3.5 times more units of what? Are we talking "gauss" or what?
If a motor is 70% efficient and 3.5 unknown units of Flux in the Maxwell unit, or flux density in the Gauss unit. Or is it the "reluctance" measured in the Oersted unit?
Is it the magnetomotive force (mmf) measured in a gilbert unit.
What unit is increased by 3.5, this does not tell us what the latter efficiency rate will be. First one would have to know what the magnetic field without the magnets measures and then add 3.5 known units to that.
And do not forget 'Magnetic field force is measured in dynes
with field strength measured in gausses. Magnetizing force is based on the units of gilbert making up the oersted..
Permeability is the ratio B/H of the flux density is measured with mmf of one gilbert is applied. And last but not least we have hysteresis loss
It is likely that it may only increase the efficiency 2 or 3 %, of 70%
As Jim_Mitch would say you cannot do math with oranges and apples.
Ralph
3.5 times more units of what? Are we talking "gauss" or what?
If a motor is 70% efficient and 3.5 unknown units of Flux in the Maxwell unit, or flux density in the Gauss unit. Or is it the "reluctance" measured in the Oersted unit?
Is it the magnetomotive force (mmf) measured in a gilbert unit.
What unit is increased by 3.5, this does not tell us what the latter efficiency rate will be. First one would have to know what the magnetic field without the magnets measures and then add 3.5 known units to that.
And do not forget 'Magnetic field force is measured in dynes
with field strength measured in gausses. Magnetizing force is based on the units of gilbert making up the oersted..
Permeability is the ratio B/H of the flux density is measured with mmf of one gilbert is applied. And last but not least we have hysteresis loss
It is likely that it may only increase the efficiency 2 or 3 %, of 70%
As Jim_Mitch would say you cannot do math with oranges and apples.
Ralph
re: Flynn over unity magnet
I dont know. I had hoped someone with more familiarity than me could make sense of the website.
Not knowing is not the problem. It is the knowing of what just isn't so.
It is our responsibilities, not ourselves,that we should take seriously.
It is our responsibilities, not ourselves,that we should take seriously.
re: Flynn over unity magnet
Kirk,
I have been chasing magnetic motor deigns with or without EMF since my education in electronics via the United States Navy in 1957, I was there the same time Beardon was in the Army taking the same classes.
IMO you cannot reach unity or over-unity when a conductor passes through a magnetic field or vise-versa. That is unless you have the whole device emersed in liquid nitrogen or some other frozen gas of low temperature. You need a super conductor that will operate at ambient temperature, and to my knowledge this has not been found yet! At leat not one that will drive a motor.
If an over-unity magnetic motor is ever invented, believe me the chances of it also utilizing EMF applied by a conductor will be mighty slim!
Ralph
I have been chasing magnetic motor deigns with or without EMF since my education in electronics via the United States Navy in 1957, I was there the same time Beardon was in the Army taking the same classes.
IMO you cannot reach unity or over-unity when a conductor passes through a magnetic field or vise-versa. That is unless you have the whole device emersed in liquid nitrogen or some other frozen gas of low temperature. You need a super conductor that will operate at ambient temperature, and to my knowledge this has not been found yet! At leat not one that will drive a motor.
If an over-unity magnetic motor is ever invented, believe me the chances of it also utilizing EMF applied by a conductor will be mighty slim!
Ralph