Robert Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator: Theory & Tips
The Robert Adams Pulsed Electric Motor/Generator
Permanent Magnet Switch | Magnetic Games
Permanent Magnet Switch | Magnet Tricks
Motoflux Power
Robert W. Alexander Dyna-Motor
FreeGen: Self Running Looped System! - Timtron
Moving Pulsed Systems
Motor–generator
How Brushless Motor and ESC Work
Easy Alternator from electric motor conversion DIY neodymium magnet install
Electric Generator Lenz's Law Part 1 Left or Right Hand Rule Physics Lesson
Hi Simon,
Can an Electric Permanent Magnet Motor be
used in a Free Energy Motor Generator? The field coils has been replace by permanent
magnets in the rotor, so it use less electric energy. If Robert Adams Motor/Generator
works, why isn't it on the market?
Best Wishes, Hermes
P.S Andrea Rossi
will show his E-Cat SK on internet, January 31, 2019 time unknown
Andrea Rossi
October 20, 2018 at 3:53 AM
Brokeeper:
Personal attendance will be
useless, because we will show in internet videos of the Ecat SK in operation and we
will answer publicly all the questions we will receive from the attendants in
internet. Since we found serious problems to get authorization to put in operation the
Ecat SK in a conference room, we have to show it by a video, which makes useless to
organize a convention in a conference room. We decided to go only on internet for this
reason. There is nothing that we could do in a conference room that we cannot do in
internet by direct streaming and everything will be easier and faster.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi Hermes,
People have been trying to do
this for centuries, and it's never worked. That makes it pretty certain that the
principle doesn't work, and there's not a lot of point in trying. That's not going to
stop people thinking they can do it, and I expect you'll find lots of people are still
trying (the QEG was one of these). There will be people who will claim to have
succeeded, but investigation of the claims using correct measurements has so far shown
that the inventor got the measurements wrong and that the batteries run down.
As to "why isn't it on the market?", the simple fact is that it doesn't actually work.
If you build one, you'll get the same results as everyone else has done.
As I keep telling you, one thing we find in science is that if we do the same thing,
we get the same results. That seems a basic law of nature that cannot be broken. Life
would be pretty difficult if that didn't happen, too.
As regards Rossi, it's
just a scam so don't get your hopes up. That should have been obvious if you take the
time to read the court documents from Rossi versus IH. The data for Doral was made-up,
and not a recording of real measurements, and that can easily be verified if you
looked at the claimed output of the "reactor" when it was recorded as being
disassembled for maintenance, even if you can't see that dissipating 1MW in that space
would have cooked the people in the warehouse. The story is simply not possible, given
what we know about steam heating.
Best regards, Simon
Hi Simon,
Nick Kraakman has been investigating the
Robert Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator: Theory & Tips and he has shown that
the motorcoils collapsing field can be used to partially charge the drive battery and
of course the generator coils can also be used to charge the battery. Is it not
overunity?
Best Wishes, Hermes
Hi Nick and Simon.
Nick,
do you think that Ali's electromagnetic switchable permanent magnet can be used as the
motor coils in
Robert Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator? I think that Ali's electromagnetic
switchable permanent magnet can be used in a solid state generator. But that is only a
guess. I need to test it before I can say yes or no. But I am sure that Ali's
electromagnetic switchable permanent magnet can be used as a drive coil in a permanent
magnetic motor.
Best Wishes, Hermes
Mehmet,
I am sure
that you can build your own version of
Robert Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator: Theory & Tips and test it to see if
it the battery runs down if you use both the current from the motor coils and
generator coils to recharge the drive battery?
Best Wishes, Hermes
Hi Hermes, Nick, and Mehmet,
Firstly, congratulations to Nick
for a good investigation. As I've mentioned before, though, pulse motors, when
combined with Lead-acid batteries, only produce more energy than they consume for a
while during the time that the battery is undergoing de-sulphation ("the battery
effect") and you'll find various ideas using pulses and batteries that the inventors
are sure works and where the inventors are honest too, but where it stops working
after a while although nothing has changed as far as the inventors can see.
Thus Magnacoaster was announced as a working system, and the inventor has continued to
try to develop it (by installing special spiral-wound batteries and upgrading
components) long after his customers got upset at the delays in delivery and the whole
thing was denounced as a scam. I had contact with one of his sponsors a while back, so
I'm pretty sure that the inventor really thought it worked and had the measurements to
prove it. Much the same with Quantum Magnetics, though he was careful not to claim OU
in those words but to imply it. The Correas were also fooled by the battery effect,
since their plasma system pulse-charged the battery. IIRC it was Dave Bowdler (may
have got his name wrong) who used "dead" batteries in something like a Tesla Switch
setup and found that he got the "dead" battery charged and the other two lasted longer
than they should have done, but like others it only worked for a while and then
unaccountably stopped working. He put that work up at PESN initially, got a fair amout
of flak, and then went to a different group and kept working. Again honest, did good
work, showed it worked, but they always failed after a while.
Net result,
though, is that pulse motors can show the appearance of OU, but actually it's not the
motor itself but the battery that's the source of the energy, and the quantity of
extra energy is limited.
Hermes - I've told you this often enough that I'd
expect you to have understood this by now. Magnetically-coupled systems,
mechanically-coupled systems, and systems that use both couplings, only bounce energy
around between the various stores and don't produce extra energy from *nowhere* (or
from zero-point energy which is effectively the same thing). In fact the concept of
zero-point energy is only really in the maths - if it really is the minimum energy
possible then by definition you can't extract any more energy from it. You will
however find some experiments using Casimir-sized cavities that show a small amount of
extra energy produced that is claimed as zero-point energy - it is in fact a violation
of 2LoT because of the change of the totally random directions of air molecules to a
partially-rectified range of directions. Since it is dogma that 2LoT cannot be
violated, the inventor expects that the energy they see must be from *something else*,
in this case zero-point.
Back to the initial question, no, this isn't OU
although it may seem to be for a while. If instead of batteries you use capacitors to
store the energy, you'll find that it will run down at the expected rate.
If
you really want OU, you need to break the symmetry of action and rection and thus
violate Conservation of Momentum (CoM), and thus also make possible a violation of
Conservation of Energy (CoE). That will probably involve working with microwave
frequencies and resonant cavities. There may be other ways that I don't know of, but
they'll be using quantum physics rather than classical physics.
Nick - might be
fun to read
http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2021/02/horizon-engineers.html and to try
to get your head around the theory. This does seem to be a workable method of
violating CoM and thus actually succeeding. On the other hand, the picture this
presents of how the universe works is quite a bit different from classical physics and
isn't intuitive.
Given the number of people who have tested various pulse motor
designs, and the amount of money that has been spent, and the competence of the people
who did the experiments, I figure that they really aren't OU and in principle will
never work. In fact, given that, the usefulness of looking at all these designs is in
order to see what _doesn't_ work, and tells you that if you want something that works
then you need to do something significantly different to those designs. They all
failed. If you do the same thing, it will fail again.
The essential word here
is "significant". The common contruction details are coils, magnets, and pulses of
power. Any combination of those will not be OU, and you need to add something to that
that is significantly different. Doing the switching using semiconductors rather than
moving contacts won't be significant. Using a bigger flywheel won't be significant.
Reducing the friction by using non- lubricated ceramic bearings won't be significant.
Fairly obviously I think it is possible to violate CoE, and that's actually in
standard theory of the Big Bang where, somehow, all the energy (and thus matter) was
created from *nothing*. However, it's also pretty obvious that all the claims of OU in
the past didn't actually work, since if they did we'd be using them - even if the
original inventor was cut out of the profits then *someone* would be profiting from
making the machines. The EMDrive itself, and Mike McCulloch's experiments (and those
of people who follow his theory) show that CoM can be violated, and thus imply that
CoE can also be violated. OU itself is not impossible, but you need to do something
significantly different to achieve it. Reading the history of OU attempts tells you
what isn't worth trying.
Best regards, Simon
Hi Simon,
What is your opinion about the Motoflux motor?
https://www.motofluxpower.com/
and does the MAG idea work?
https://overunity.com/18563/magnetic-air-coil-generator-mag/
Best Wishes,
Hermes
Hi Hermes,
You've asked about the Motoflux motor before. The answer remains the same - it's not a
gainful system. Much the same for the MAG system, since that's from 2020 and given the
simplicity, if it worked, we'd know by now.
Still the same problem that these
designs do not break a relevant symmetry. With coils, magnets, and mechanical
movements, the energy in the field and the energy you put in or take out are balanced.
Put some energy in, it gets stored in the field, take it out and it comes from the
field.
Thus you need to find a way to control the magnetic field without using
an electromagnet or by moving a permanent magnet (or some magnetic component that
shifts/changes the field). It's not easy. However, unless you can do that you won't
break the symmetry, and the device remains stubbornly lossy no matter how clever your
theory is. Reality remains what it is.
As I've said before, it's not
impossible. You can control the superconductivity of a material using a tuned laser,
which therefore enables or disables the Meissner effect. May be other ways, too.
However, building something that does that is technically difficult, and not something
most people can do in the back shed.
Still, all those "traditional" Free Energy
ideas don't work (except those that harvest ambient energy, which have limited
usefulness). You have to find at least a principle that hasn't been tried before. The
obvious route is to to break the right symmetry, which also means you need to be able
to recognise what the symmetry is and how it is possible to break it.
Best
regards, Simon
Hermes,
Robert Adams Pulsed Electric Motor
Generator latest replication here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkcVtNjKY7k Well built but way under unity.
It's very easy to speculate whether or not such motor can be an over unity or
or under unity. If you make the parts by hand it will take a lot's time and the parts
will not be that precise. If you don't have access to 3d printer or auto cad designing
ability and design and send the parts to be laser or waterjet cut, then you must make
the parts by hand to test your ideas.
Talking about this subject if any of you
like to test some ideas I can help design the parts for you.
Over the years
with many hours of practice I learned the basic drawing on
eMachineShop programming. It's easy to learn the program, but you need time and
interest. Nowadays that's what I do, make the drawing, send the file to either laser
cutting service or a waterjet cutting service and they cut the parts for me. These are
the companies that I use.
https://onlinewaterjet.com/ and
https://app.oshcut.com/cart Both companies are very reasonable and they ship fast.
I attached a simple DXF drawing I made which is converted to jpeg for quick
visuals. This a small part that I need it for a small test project which 104 mm
diameter 6 mm thick metal, or so. but you can see how time consuming can be if you try
to make these parts by hand?
Regards, Mehmet.
back to linkpage
suggestion
read and sign my guestbook