Very nice. Question. I see the magnets are fixed to the copper disk. When you load the output, does it cause drag on the system like a normal gen? Because if the magnet is spinning with the disk, what would it be dragging against, if it does.. If it doesnt, then no drag on the system is or should be the highway to OU. If there is drag, then this may be the seed to magnetic propulsion. ;) Mags
The brushes put some drag on the disks. However, we didn't measure how much it would increase if the current were increased. Yes, you could run this unit as a motor if you put current in instead of taking it out. The motor version would be like the unit in video Exx-009.
So if the contacting points are increades, will voltage increase? I would like to see if we have 3~4 contacting wires round the outter rim. Some people uses a graphite pencels. Thanks for sharing your experiment.
We would need to measure that. What is observed and measured is the deciding factor. My feeling however is that it would increase the current, not the voltage (since the magnetic field lines are not cut at a higher speed).
In the case where there is no voltage I urge you to measure the current though the bridge. You will notice there will be a current flow even through there is no voltage across the axles.
The first item are the magnets, but that large they are difficult to find. Our source doesnt have them any more. The 2nd item are the copper disks. You can get them via a laser-cutting or waterjet cutting company.
Hi, I believe that another possibility exists. Your experiments suggest and support that the induction is produced at the brushes, but I disagree with that conclusion. What I believe is happening with the 'Stud bridged disks’ experiments is that there is an opposite voltage induced in the studs; this is because of the rotation. If you analyze the flux lines of the magnets you will notice that the closing lines of magnetic flux on both magnets induce a voltage that oposes the ones in the magnet. Similar to the case where you were sliding the brushes beyond the rim of the magnet over the metal plate, the further you move the brushes from the magnet the more counter voltage (again due to the lines of flux closing). The only solution I can see is shielding the studs so no counter induction is produced...sight...easier said than done. Keep up the good work.
It think we didn't call for induction as being the deciding factor of what is happening at the brushes. If it would be induction there would not be the need for actual contact. But contact is needed for generation of current in this set-up. So it seems something else is going on.
the field around the magnet disk should be stationer, but the body of the magnet itself act as a moving conductor. since the body magnet spin, your brush sense the voltage different from center and the rim. why? because the body of magnet cut the line of force at different speed with rardius "r" from the center. as a result let say the brush sense different density of a magnetism. but i would not consider electric current as flow of electron. in my conclution the body of a magnet it self act as a battery
The main Question remains: If there is induction in the Brushes (as you claim), there must be also induction in the disc when only the magnet is rotating (disc is stationary), also must there be induction in the disc when only the magnet is stationary, in this case there should be no induction in the Brushes and only in the cooper disc. Problem is, when the magnet alone is rotating (relative to the disk), there is no induction happening. The point of Faraday was, that the Rotation of the Magnet doesn't matter. I can't see any disprovel of that in your Videos tbh.
It think we didn't call for induction as being the deciding factor of what is happening at the brushes. If it is induction there would not be the need for actual contact. But contact is needed for generation of current in this set-up. So it seems something else is going on. - We are in the process of developing a theory regarding the Faraday Disk, based on observations in the experiments. As we have stated on the forum and in the videos, we have limited our statements to the one-piece, co-rotating Faraday Disk and related set-ups, such as Tesla's Dynamo Electric Machine. We have not yet made tests with the other situations where the magnet or disk is stationary. We are therefor reluctant to comment on them. Our goal is, first, to make the theory work in all scenarios of the one-piece, co-rotating environment and we are almost there. In light of the presented findings (videos Exx-013 through Exx-018) there should be no more doubt that the brushes, leads or tips are acting like batteries, creating both sides of the current. Of course, we remain always open to new facts and observations. - On a quick note re the stationary magnet / rotating disk question: It is important to recognize the fact that the disk needs to turn to have something going on electrically. And the presence of a magnet is required. If the current is the same in orientation and strength, this would suggest that we are dealing with the same situation as with the one-piece, co-rotating disk. The conclusion could be that the disk, in presence of a magnetic field, creates a condition as if we are dealing with moving lines of force. But this is nothing but a little brainstorming without having done any tests. And btw the lines of force are just a way to illustrate an idea.
@@scienceexxience I personaly don't like the idea of the brushes acting like "batteries", what happens here is fairly simple, the disc rotates at different speeds depending on the radius. For example the velocity of the disc near the shaft is slower than on the outher edge. Concequently according to lenz law there is a pressure difference between the inner and the outher circle of the disc. It's quite similar to a condensator, now if you shortcut the inner and outer ring with a non rotating wire you will have a current flowing as expected and observed. So basically what we do here is charge separation unless a wire shortcuts the rotating "batterie". We will also have a small tork when the wire is connected. Done so in the 1950s and 1960s at the Australian National University. With their device they could accumulate high energy and discharge it quite fast for high current experiments. The question about the paradox with the stationary/rotating magnet is more like: Is the magnet the source of magnetism or is he just creating a space altering effect like a mirror or a lense ?
In video Exx-003 we have pointed out the anomalies that the standard theory you are citing can't explain. If you want to continue the discussion, tell us at which point (timestamp) in the videos Exx-003, and Exx-004, Exx-013 through Exx-018 we are wrong. We have all the parts and pieces available to recreate the experiments.
@@scienceexxience My goal is only to understand the farraday paradox, not to attack someone. I just came to different conclusions than you. Maybe we can find out if i'm wrong or not. 1. In Exx-003 at 4:52, i think you forgot something. There is induction happening in the moving connection rods between the discs. I'll explain why, the magnetic field of the opposing magnets will change direction between the magnets, in the center of the two opposing magnets the field direction is vertical. Now the rods are moving in that field at the speed of the outer disc rims and according to lens law an opposing pressure (to the disk rims) is induced. That's why (almost) no current is flowing in those rods. 2. In Exx-003 at 6:38 your conclusion is that the tenssion is build in the probes by cutting magnet field lines and not in the disc. If that would be the case, you would not have to connect the probes to the disk and get a voltage difference. Second, the voltage drop would change if you simply change the angle of the probes in the magnetic field (lenz law). I have some different conlusions to the other videos aswel, but let's just clear this one up first maybe by solving the problem there will be no further questions :)
I didn't feel attacked. And I am not counterattacking. It's good to have a conversation if the goal of the participants is to find out the truth (what science should be all about). Re 1: In Exx-003 we have pointed out the problem that there is no tension at the axles, where there should be according to the official theory. You are suggesting that the opposing magnetic field is somehow preventing the current from flowing. (These are very thick copper rods that would require a huge magnetic field to engage in any kind of relevant induction.) Q1: Why is it then that we can show electrical connection via the ohmmeter between the two axles? Please keep in mind that a flow of current is required to measure the resistance? Q2: And also why is it then that at 4:52 in Exx-015 (btw. your link is to Exx-015 not Exx-003) there is still no current measurable at the axles, although we are creating a current with the copper-band-brushes? The answer is that the current created by the brushes is immediately shorted out via the connecting rods. If we take voltmeter tips instead of the brushes we can measure tension (another proof that the brushes create the current), but the current is going nowhere because it is, again, shorted out by the rods. So there is no significant induction going on in the rods. Only when we remove the connecting rods from the unit and use the copper-band-brushes we do get the voltage at the axles. It is also interesting to note that according to our experiment in video Exx-013 there is no current creation without the use of brushes. A magnet that is rotating without a brush creates nothing. Re 2: As mentioned before, it appears that it is not induction what is going on in the brushes. It looks like in there very tip, where the contact is made with the magnet/disc under the influence of the magnetic field lines, there is the current creation going on with a split of the current, sending one side (pos/neg) in one direction (i.e. the magnet/disc) and the other side (neg/pos) along the brush. I'm sorry but it seems that Lenz's Law needs to be revised. Well, if you would like to discuss another video, let's take video Exx-018. It would be interesting to see how the anomaly of low voltage at the rims and high voltage at the axles is explained by Lenz's law or other theory.
Very nice. Question. I see the magnets are fixed to the copper disk. When you load the output, does it cause drag on the system like a normal gen? Because if the magnet is spinning with the disk, what would it be dragging against, if it does.. If it doesnt, then no drag on the system is or should be the highway to OU. If there is drag, then this may be the seed to magnetic propulsion. ;)
Mags
The brushes put some drag on the disks. However, we didn't measure how much it would increase if the current were increased. Yes, you could run this unit as a motor if you put current in instead of taking it out. The motor version would be like the unit in video Exx-009.
So if the contacting points are increades, will voltage increase?
I would like to see if we have 3~4 contacting wires round the outter rim. Some people uses a graphite pencels. Thanks for sharing your experiment.
We would need to measure that. What is observed and measured is the deciding factor. My feeling however is that it would increase the current, not the voltage (since the magnetic field lines are not cut at a higher speed).
In the case where there is no voltage I urge you to measure the current though the bridge. You will notice there will be a current flow even through there is no voltage across the axles.
What is the timestamp on the video?
@@scienceexxience 4:30
The bridge creates the current (difference in potential) which in turn is immediately shorted out by the rim rods. That's the most likely scenario.
Imagine each tip of the bridge as acting like a battery. We will be posting a video soon how we imagine that. Dec/10/2018
WHAT IF YOU MAKE THE DISKS TOUCH LIKE GEARS INSTEAD OF USING THE CHAIN ????? Also this made the think of the SEG
My son wants to build one. What's the best way to get the parts?
The first item are the magnets, but that large they are difficult to find. Our source doesnt have them any more. The 2nd item are the copper disks. You can get them via a laser-cutting or waterjet cutting company.
Hi, I believe that another possibility exists. Your experiments suggest and support that the induction is produced at the brushes, but I disagree with that conclusion. What I believe is happening with the 'Stud bridged disks’ experiments is that there is an opposite voltage induced in the studs; this is because of the rotation. If you analyze the flux lines of the magnets you will notice that the closing lines of magnetic flux on both magnets induce a voltage that oposes the ones in the magnet. Similar to the case where you were sliding the brushes beyond the rim of the magnet over the metal plate, the further you move the brushes from the magnet the more counter voltage (again due to the lines of flux closing). The only solution I can see is shielding the studs so no counter induction is produced...sight...easier said than done. Keep up the good work.
It think we didn't call for induction as being the deciding factor of what is happening at the brushes. If it would be induction there would not be the need for actual contact. But contact is needed for generation of current in this set-up. So it seems something else is going on.
the field around the magnet disk should be stationer, but the body of the magnet itself act as a moving conductor. since the body magnet spin, your brush sense the voltage different from center and the rim. why? because the body of magnet cut the line of force at different speed with rardius "r" from the center. as a result let say the brush sense different density of a magnetism. but i would not consider electric current as flow of electron. in my conclution the body of a magnet it self act as a battery
The main Question remains: If there is induction in the Brushes (as you claim), there must be also induction in the disc when only the magnet is rotating (disc is stationary), also must there be induction in the disc when only the magnet is stationary, in this case there should be no induction in the Brushes and only in the cooper disc. Problem is, when the magnet alone is rotating (relative to the disk), there is no induction happening.
The point of Faraday was, that the Rotation of the Magnet doesn't matter. I can't see any disprovel of that in your Videos tbh.
It think we didn't call for induction as being the deciding factor of what is happening at the brushes. If it is induction there would not be the need for actual contact. But contact is needed for generation of current in this set-up. So it seems something else is going on.
-
We are in the process of developing a theory regarding the Faraday Disk, based on observations in the experiments. As we have stated on the forum and in the videos, we have limited our statements to the one-piece, co-rotating Faraday Disk and related set-ups, such as Tesla's Dynamo Electric Machine. We have not yet made tests with the other situations where the magnet or disk is stationary. We are therefor reluctant to comment on them. Our goal is, first, to make the theory work in all scenarios of the one-piece, co-rotating environment and we are almost there. In light of the presented findings (videos Exx-013 through Exx-018) there should be no more doubt that the brushes, leads or tips are acting like batteries, creating both sides of the current. Of course, we remain always open to new facts and observations.
-
On a quick note re the stationary magnet / rotating disk question: It is important to recognize the fact that the disk needs to turn to have something going on electrically. And the presence of a magnet is required. If the current is the same in orientation and strength, this would suggest that we are dealing with the same situation as with the one-piece, co-rotating disk. The conclusion could be that the disk, in presence of a magnetic field, creates a condition as if we are dealing with moving lines of force. But this is nothing but a little brainstorming without having done any tests. And btw the lines of force are just a way to illustrate an idea.
@@scienceexxience I personaly don't like the idea of the brushes acting like "batteries", what happens here is fairly simple, the disc rotates at different speeds depending on the radius. For example the velocity of the disc near the shaft is slower than on the outher edge. Concequently according to lenz law there is a pressure difference between the inner and the outher circle of the disc. It's quite similar to a condensator, now if you shortcut the inner and outer ring with a non rotating wire you will have a current flowing as expected and observed. So basically what we do here is charge separation unless a wire shortcuts the rotating "batterie". We will also have a small tork when the wire is connected. Done so in the 1950s and 1960s at the Australian National University. With their device they could accumulate high energy and discharge it quite fast for high current experiments.
The question about the paradox with the stationary/rotating magnet is more like: Is the magnet the source of magnetism or is he just creating a space altering effect like a mirror or a lense ?
In video Exx-003 we have pointed out the anomalies that the standard theory you are citing can't explain. If you want to continue the discussion, tell us at which point (timestamp) in the videos Exx-003, and Exx-004, Exx-013 through Exx-018 we are wrong. We have all the parts and pieces available to recreate the experiments.
@@scienceexxience My goal is only to understand the farraday paradox, not to attack someone. I just came to different conclusions than you. Maybe we can find out if i'm wrong or not.
1. In Exx-003 at 4:52, i think you forgot something. There is induction happening in the moving connection rods between the discs. I'll explain why, the magnetic field of the opposing magnets will change direction between the magnets, in the center of the two opposing magnets the field direction is vertical. Now the rods are moving in that field at the speed of the outer disc rims and according to lens law an opposing pressure (to the disk rims) is induced. That's why (almost) no current is flowing in those rods.
2. In Exx-003 at 6:38 your conclusion is that the tenssion is build in the probes by cutting magnet field lines and not in the disc. If that would be the case, you would not have to connect the probes to the disk and get a voltage difference. Second, the voltage drop would change if you simply change the angle of the probes in the magnetic field (lenz law).
I have some different conlusions to the other videos aswel, but let's just clear this one up first maybe by solving the problem there will be no further questions :)
I didn't feel attacked. And I am not counterattacking. It's good to have a conversation if the goal of the participants is to find out the truth (what science should be all about).
Re 1: In Exx-003 we have pointed out the problem that there is no tension at the axles, where there should be according to the official theory. You are suggesting that the opposing magnetic field is somehow preventing the current from flowing. (These are very thick copper rods that would require a huge magnetic field to engage in any kind of relevant induction.)
Q1: Why is it then that we can show electrical connection via the ohmmeter between the two axles? Please keep in mind that a flow of current is required to measure the resistance?
Q2: And also why is it then that at 4:52 in Exx-015 (btw. your link is to Exx-015 not Exx-003) there is still no current measurable at the axles, although we are creating a current with the copper-band-brushes?
The answer is that the current created by the brushes is immediately shorted out via the connecting rods. If we take voltmeter tips instead of the brushes we can measure tension (another proof that the brushes create the current), but the current is going nowhere because it is, again, shorted out by the rods. So there is no significant induction going on in the rods. Only when we remove the connecting rods from the unit and use the copper-band-brushes we do get the voltage at the axles.
It is also interesting to note that according to our experiment in video Exx-013 there is no current creation without the use of brushes. A magnet that is rotating without a brush creates nothing.
Re 2: As mentioned before, it appears that it is not induction what is going on in the brushes. It looks like in there very tip, where the contact is made with the magnet/disc under the influence of the magnetic field lines, there is the current creation going on with a split of the current, sending one side (pos/neg) in one direction (i.e. the magnet/disc) and the other side (neg/pos) along the brush.
I'm sorry but it seems that Lenz's Law needs to be revised.
Well, if you would like to discuss another video, let's take video Exx-018. It would be interesting to see how the anomaly of low voltage at the rims and high voltage at the axles is explained by Lenz's law or other theory.
wow