Is this OU?

[gcol]

Ring configuration:

 

After giving my brain a couple of caffeine shots, I came up with this, and you will be hardput to dissuade me.

 

12 magnets, for convenience, arranged in a circle, numbered as a clock face.

Turn the 6 o'clock, the 7 and 5 will move. the 8 and 4 less, 9 and 3 even less, and 12 o'clock not at all, because it is being acted on equally and oppositely. Thus we have in effect two straight lines of magnets, where the 12 magnet acts as the common fixed end.

 

From here, one can fiddle with uneven strength and spacing as before, so that with care any magnet from 7 through 12 to 5 may act as fixed.

[rewebster]

gcol--

 

I think you're right ---a circular config as a stand-alone wouldn't work; the same as a straight line config of exactly the same magnets with equal spacing.

 

 

 

 

But, I would think that a straight line with increasing space or decreasing strength would. Would it produce power? (more than input)

[rewebster]

Whether or not any of these machines (the magnetic ones) work, in the sense of 'making more power than what it should', they appear to be experimenting in one of the 'unknown' forces. Magnets have unusual properties to do strange things.

 

If someone somehow built two nearly identical machines, one using magnets and one without; and, the one without magnets used 10 watts with an output of 5 watts, and the one using magnets used 10 watts with a output of 8 watts--that would still be worth looking into more.

 

The thought experiment with the increasing distance with exact magnets (and turning the first) may be a good test to see if more work can be gotten from the work done down the series. If I had the right magnets, I think I would give it a try to see if I could get a setup to, at least, flip them all. The real 'lab' test should be able to measure the work (forces) of turning the first as compared to the total work down the series. It would be an interesting experiment.

[gcol]

I had the impresion, perhaps wrongly, that a big criticism of the experiment that gave rise to this thread lay in the aparatus that measured total input power against output, and whether this arrangement itself gave rise to error. If there is a mysterious unknown force at work, and its effect is minimal, there must be no doubt at all concerning input/output measurement.

 

Personally,I would be convinced only if as input, something as simple as a mechanical constant torque device provided input, and a similar device showed output.

 

For example a descending weight on a string around a drum for input, and a similar drum/string/weight as output. But then left to itself, the system would, surely, either hang in equilibrium, or drive in either direction depending on weight differential. There is nothing in a string of magnets that has an inherent quality of directionality, surely, unless perhaps we consider what to me is the unresolved question of whether the forces of attraction are greater than the forces of repulsion perhaps.

[Rocket Man]

suppose you have the linear config with even spacing but make the magnets eliptical or such (poles closer together) so that the force required to rotate them is null plus friction.

in other words, work out a shape of magnet where by the force attracting the poles together is evened out by the distance between surfaces being closer at the 90 degree mark.

i think that might give the required "no load, no force" coupling.

(you'd have a hell of a time magnetising the peices though)

if you lock one, the others will try to find an equilibrium, reducing the rotation as you go down the line. there's still the problem of lateral forces though, and the magnets would have to be exactly shaped so as to aviod the coupling being broken by uneven forces as they rotate.

 

gcol, question of repulsion-attraction, there was once a thread where someone asked why a spinning manget is attracted to another magnet when the time attracting = the time repelling. i think the verdict was that the un-aligned particles in the magnets were aligning temporarily, constituting a net attractive force.

[rewebster]

Personally,I would be convinced only if as input, something as simple as a mechanical constant torque device provided input, and a similar device showed output.

 

That's any device, though--What someone is looking for in building these things is getting more out than what is expected.

 

 

There is nothing in a string of magnets that has an inherent quality of directionality

 

the attractive and repulsive forces---those are directional

 

unless perhaps we consider what to me is the unresolved question of whether the forces of attraction are greater than the forces of repulsion perhaps.

 

Those, I believe, have been always shown to be equal

 

 

 

suppose you have the linear config with even spacing but make the magnets eliptical or such (poles closer together) so that the force required to rotate them is null plus friction.

 

yeah, I think you're right--Equilibrium would still come into play for the total forces plus the friction. I think spacing would be the key in a linear, 'same exact magnet' setup.

[alan2here]

may i recommend we ignore inertia for the moment

 

No

 

Yes there will be a delay in the rotation of the second magnet due to interia

 

Exactly, otherwise you would have to pull all the magnets round half a turn in turning the first one.

 

12 magnets, for convenience, arranged in a circle, numbered as a clock face. Turn the 6 o'clock, the 7 and 5 will move. the 8 and 4 less, 9 and 3 even less, and 12 o'clock not at all.

 

Now imagine that it is not a circle but a line, where the first magnet (the one we rotated at the start) is fixed in place but the last magnet in the line is not, after all that rotating stated in the above quote has happened the second third ect... will continue to turn a bit more untill they are all lined up. eventually friction will stop this hapening after a line of a cirtain length, but that length will be verry long.

[gcol]

No

 

Now imagine that it is not a circle but a line, where the first magnet (the one we rotated at the start) is fixed in place but the last magnet in the line is not, after all that rotating stated in the above quote has happened the second third ect... will continue to turn a bit more untill they are all lined up. eventually friction will stop this hapening after a line of a cirtain length, but that length will be verry long.

 

A line of magnets was, I seem to remember, the first case to be considered.

 

As to friction, by using deliberately constricted bearings individual magnet friction could easily be introduced as a deliberate experimental variable, and the line of magnets kept rather short. I think straight lines/circles and friction are red herrings that do not affect the principles under consideration.

[rewebster]

As to friction, by using deliberately constricted bearings individual magnet friction could easily be introduced as a deliberate experimental variable,

 

 

needle point pivots would/might help

 

 

One of my favorite things around the house is a radiometer, and it uses a needle (and the needle point) as a pivot (weight bearing point) to rotate on.

[alan2here]

I think straight lines/circles and friction are red herrings

 

It wont work at least the way I intended it with a circle, it needs one fixed and one free end, circles have no end's only a verry long middle.

 

Also, friction is not a good thing.

[rewebster]

If YOU build it

 

 

 

they will come

[rewebster]

Someone needs to want to build this

 

 

---six or eight exactly the same magnets, some super glue, a few straight pins or thumb tacks glued to the magnets, small pieces of glass pipettes (to hold the pins in place) glued to two parallel glass plates---

[alan2here]

Iv'e been trying to build it today, the magnets I'm using are strong enough to spin around and face north\south if u put them down on the table on there own, however the magnet quality is not representative of the quality of the rest of the equipment. Im using blue tack and milk bottle tops and stuff

 

At the moment I have the problem that I can't get all 5 in the line witout some of the middle ones pulling towards each other. If I add something in between them to maintain the corect spacing it creates to much friction, or they flip un into the air and over the top of the thing ect...

 

However, despite this I got 4 in a line to work and the result is verry unexpected, they actually speed up as it goes along the line, the first turns about half way round before the second does and it continues almost like a wave along the line but each one being faster than the previous.

[rewebster]

Did you make them evenly spaced; or did you increase space as you went down the line (the better way via the thought experiment above)?

[alan2here]

evenly spaced, there is verry little margin for anything else with how I have it set up, if they are to close they all slide towards each other and stick together, to far apart and there is not enough effect to keep the wave going.

[rewebster]

I'm thinking that the incremently 'increase' in spacing may only have to be as little as 1/8 or 1/4 of an inch down the line. What kind of setup did you do for the pivoting mechanism?

[gcol]

alan2here:

Well done, well done, and unexpected effect, too! I presume they were all free to turn, none fixed?

 

I had only two of the magnets I needed to hand for my build, thinking I had others tucked away somewhere.After a lot of searching I remembered I had given the others away to a young experimenter fifteen years ago. Now if I can source some more....... (commercially, magnets of a similar type cost about £30-£40 each!)

 

Silly thought...If each magnet "twitched" faster than the previous, they would induce a higher voltage in an adjacent coil, down the line. Relatively high voltage eventually produced from a slow moving input with no mechanical gearing, just magnetic gearing. Did not expect that.

[rewebster]

Well, another thing that hasn't been brought up yet is that if there was a coil around each magnet down the line, the changing field as the magnet rotated would set up an electric current in the coil, and that electric current could easily be measured and/or utilized.....

 

 

Of course, the field set up around the coil may effect the system.

 

-------------------------------

The coil could even be incorporated as part of the 'housing' mechanism for holding the pivot and the pivot bearing point.

---------------------------------

 

gcol---I guess my suggestion was just a variation of yours (after reading your post three more times-- so, good thinking, gcol, it seems we're thinking sort of alike then)

 

--------------------------------------

alan2here:

Well done, well done, and unexpected effect, too!

 

yes--I should have also said this, too--(I guess I was thinking ahead before)

 

---------------------------------------------------

 

I still think that circular magnets (I would guess that are out there to be found some place) where the N-S axis was across the diameter would be best. They wouldn't have the corners of the ends extend farther into the field of the preceeding and next magnet to have a higher field density as they turn to overcome the rotation.

[rewebster]

alan2here ---any more work on your centipede of magnets?

[alan2here]

lol, I can't really do any more, I don't know how to go about building all the mecanism needed.

 

centipede of magnets

lol

[rewebster]

Let's see---

 

Having the least amount of friction is best. Getting the weight of the magnets to rest on a needle point would help. So if you glued pins or thumb tacks on the 'between the poles' sides (so that the magnets would be able to get close pole-to-pole), they could rotate around the poles.

 

Getting the pins glued in the exact center may be tricky and it may take a few attempts on each side of each magnets to get it fairly close,--you don't want them to woggle if you can help it. (this may be one of the more frustrating things to get 'right'.)

 

The pins would become the axes (pl. of axis). But you have to have some thing to hold the pins/axes in place; so that is why I suggested the little glass pipettes (to be 'less-friction' bearings). Something besides glass pipettes would work, but the idea is to have the least amount of friction, and 'something' moving/pivoting on glass would be low friction. If you could think of some small glass/metal cup (curved bottom) like an 1/8 inch across to be the pin point axil pivoting point, that would be great--because you have to keep the pin/axis in place pretty precisely. ----Maybe use a flat piece of brass (or something non-magnetic and drill a small indentation into the metal. But you have to have two of these that match up--one for the bottom and one for the top. Then the tricky 'measurement' part would be separating the plates (and holding them apart) just far enough to hold the pins/axes in place, but still allow for free rotation without pressure causing more friction.

 

For a straight line of magnets, I would still probably the increase the distance between each of the magnets by, say, an 1/8 to a 1/4 inch more as you went down the line, at least for maybe the first trials. The more interesting trials would be straight (no increase in space), then on to the circular (no increase in space), then some setup, like gcol (and i) thought of with the coils to test and then gather power. And there's the final kicker, if enough power is generated from the coils (the coils are actually 'generators') to be able to match the force needed to overcome the force needed to turn (and keep turning one magnet-IF it is necessary to have to keep turning one)---THEN you have created a self sustaining system!!!

 

Do you see?

[rewebster]

Instead of a drill indentation, maybe a punched (with a nail punch) indentation. If you used a nail punch, you could more easily make new or additional pivot points.

 

 

If you could find something the shape of a pellet (a lead pellet for a bb air rifle) to use an a axil/pivot holder, but made out of something a little harder would be great. A pellet may work for a while (long enough to get some results) but the needle would make a hole (and friction) before too long. Cardboard (a whole lot easier) would work for the two plates if you could find/think of something to use for the pivot points/holders.

[alan2here]

Re-reading this thread I can't believe how I used to be Or what a difficult problem to solve this is. Could we just do it with maths.

 

Cylindrical feromagnetic solids that have size, weight and momentum bound by (rotation only constraints that have some friction) with some external infulence at the end.

[alan2here]

Thanks for taking an interest. Can you post a diagram? I found your long paragraph hard to follow.

 

My idea does not take into account the time it takes for a magnet to sence the effect of another as it is insignificant at thease speeds.

Edited January 4, 2010 by alan2here