I was totally fascinated by your email. It rang several bells, the ones
which I could find, I am posting here. Anyway, I posted your email to
the list and subscribed you so you could directly communicate with
everyone here. I am looking forward to the responses as you certainly
DO seem to have found something peculiar.
As I am reading it, you seem to be saying that using a nonuniform
magnetic field in conjunction with a highly charged spinning disck, that
a propulsion force can be generated.
I need to apologize for the size of this but I don't have the two files
posted and it won't attach to the archives so I just included them so
you and everyone could see how they correlate. Sorry for the size of
this post but I feel its important.
You will see three dots before every capital F...that is a quirk of this
listserver...if you DON'T put something in front of a capital F on the
first position of a line...everything that follows will not be sent to
the archive....so information will be missing...
(NOTE: Eric - if you want off the list, follow the instructions at the
bottom of this post, just type leave and it will automatically remove
you - I don't subscribe hotmail or other faux addresses unless the
person can show they will be a responsible contributor, in your case, I
am amazed at what you are reporting so figured you should definitely be
on the list!)
==================
Subject: ..... Hi
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 03:33:45 -0700
...From: Eric Reed <etreed@thevision.net>
To: jdecker@keelynet.com
..... I'm not a subscriber to the posts of the web, in fact I just found
it and was very surprised at the amount of individuals whom are curious
about magnetics with regards to various designs of Faraday's induction
principles HPG.
Since you seem to be one of the main contributors to many of the
articles I thought I would bring some curious things that I have found
over the years in this related area for your scrutiny.
....Firstly I would like to briefly cover something rather simple but
that has further implications I think in another area.
This involves two simple conductors that are pointed at each other and
are reasonably close, we move a magnetic field across only one of the
conductors, this conductor via induction obtains a charge separation
during this interval and an electric field propagates around its
proximity.
Since the other conductor is rather close, this electric field should
induce an electric charge separation in it also, but of a lesser degree
naturally, but nevertheless it should take place. More on this later.
Secondly, While looking into electromagnetics some years ago I compared
some of the uniform verses non uniform magnetic fields and the reactions
they have upon charged particles, and as you know there are major
differences between these two types of fields and how charges move
within them.
Basically a charge emitted into a uniform magnetic field develops a
centripetal acceleration, whereas in its nonuniform counterpart this
particle will have both a centripetal and linear acceleration, this
linear acceleration being in the direction of B field, lines of force if
you will and this acceleration is towards the area where the magnetic
field is weakest ( less flux density ).
Note: plasma physics covers these principles very well: however what
intrigued me was the idea of rotating a charged disk in this nonuniform
magnetic field rather then emitting a charged particle, it would seem
from a straight forward fashion that the physics would be the same, that
is to say the rotating charged disk would accelerate in a linear
direction while rotating in this field.
This affect would not occur with a uniform magnetic field. Since this
charged disk is under an acceleration it has a certain amount of force
upon it, that depending on the magnitudes of our units of course.
Now as with most cases in similar idea's we can keep the charged disk
stationary and rotate the nonuniform magnetic field instead, and like
wise the force and acceleration should be applied to the disk as well.
Now a very curious point I would like to show you in this last
arrangement, since we rotate the nonuniform magnetic field and keep the
charged disk stationary, we can also attach the source of this rotating
magnetic field ( permanent magnet ) to the disk via an axis which
couples both together, yet doesn't hinder the magnets rotation.
Am I overlooking something here or would not the disk pull the magnet
with it if proper magnitudes are used for the field and charged disk?
I was very curious about this and searched all my physics books,
searched local university libraries and found absolutely nothing about
rotating charged mass ( not plasma ) in non uniform magnetic fields.
Out of desperation for answers I contacted and met with a college
physics teacher to inquire about this issue, and after drawing the
general idea's and both of us agreeing on the principles involved and
that no laws were being broken, he said he had never seen this before
and was for the most part stunned and at a loss of words.
We both agreed that the rotating non uniform magnetic field would create
an accelerated force upon the charged disk whether it was attached or
not, and he said that he couldn't understand this, and said basically it
would be like trying to pull ones self up by his own boots straps, but
he said it doesn't make sense because its still under a force either way
we arrange it..........
Now back to the aspects of the conductor issue mentioned at the top of
this letter, lets say we have a thick flat cylindrical magnet which
rotates upon a nonferrous metal disk of same diameter, and that the axis
of this magnet is of a conductive nature ( metal ) , same material as
magnetic would be fine, the point being both stator ( disk ) and
rotating magnetic ( rotor ) have a conductive path between them at dead
center.
After induction where the + charges collect at the rim of the disk, the
-- charges gather near the axis area, and an electric field develops
between them, if the magnitudes of our units are of proper levels, and
the distance between rotating magnet and disk are close enough, it would
seem straight forward that the E field would induce negative charges to
collect at the rim of the gyro magnet, now we have negative and positive
charges revolving around each other relative to each other, doesn't
relativity apply here ? Does the + charge at the rim of the disk see
the -- charge on the rim of the gyro as being more negative then it
really is, and vis versa ????
Also since we have charges moving relative to each other in near
proximity another magnetic field should develop, this magnetic field
either supporting or subtracting from the original depending on which
direction we revolve this magnetic gyro. With the supporting view in
mind it would seem that charge separation ( induction ) would be greatly
increased to perhaps even dangerous levels, but very curious never the
less.
any comments WOULD be greatly appreciated....
signed perplexed
etreed@hotmail.com
thank you for any input
to this curious area
===========================
There are a couple of files that relate to this claiming that EM could
produce such a propulsion;
This one, dealing with a magnetically induced precession effect was on
the BBS and called MAGFORCE.ASC
The electric Biefeld-Brown effect has a magnetic counterpart.
by Larry Adams REVISED 13 JUN 1995
The following explains how magnetic resonance might propel an iron
sphere in the vertical z direction. No interaction with the earth's
magnetic field is involved; a force is developed internally that opposes
the force of gravity. Magnetic resonance in its various forms, NMR,
EPR, and EFR, are all applied to relatively small specimens and, with
the exception of EFR, are rarely applied to magnetic materials. EFR
means Electron Ferromagnetic Resonance, and the best intro to this
subject is by Vonsovskii.
Curiously, there is no published data on EFR for large ferromagnetic
specimens. A literature search at a campus of the University of
California revealed nothing. F. Herlach has said that there is an 'open'
literature and a 'closed' literature concerning magnetic research. The
basic assumption made here is that the principles are the same for
specimens small and large, but that there may be nonlinearities
associated with larger ferromagnetic bodies.
Magnetic resonance is similar, yet different, from mechanical gyroscopy.
There is a precession of the vectors of angular momentum and magnetic
moment. The negative change in the potential energy between the moment
and the field divided by the coordinate change along the direction of
the field equals a unidirectional force along the direction of the
field. The moment U precesses at an angle about the vertical. Changes in
this angle are due to pulsations of B. This force does not exist in
ordinary magnetism, because the precession initially developed by the
application of B quickly damps out. Microwave radiation at the
precession frequency must be administered at right angles to the field
direction of B to sustain the precession. The center of the magnetic
moment corresponds to the center of mass.
Note that changes in P.E. are more significant than P.E. alone. The
following is a non-calculus derivation of the force. The change in a
quantity is preceeded with a "d" meaning delta. We have a solid iron
sphere resting on the earth, with a magnetizing coil wrapped around it.
(A cylinder would work but it produces demagnetizing fields that must be
reckoned with in the calculation of the resonance frequency). The xz
coordinate system originates at the center of mass. The magnetizing
field, B, parallels the vertical diameter, in the +z direction. The
resonance frequency is applied perpendicular to B, along the x
direction. Before powering the magnetizing coil, the magnetic moment U
of the sphere is not aligned with the vertical diameter. When the coil
is energized, U begins a damped precession about the vertical.
If the alternating field along the x-direction is not applied, the
precession of U will damp out completely. The alternating field at the
precession (resonance) frequency maintains a uniform precession of U.
Actually, the angle U makes with the vertical, varies with the pulsing
of B. B varies in and out of resonance. The precession vector Wp has the
same direction as B; it lies along the vertical diameter, in the +z
direction.
The expression for magnetic potential energy is:
E(B,U) = -BU cos Theta
where Theta is the angle between B and U. The above is true statically
and dynamically. U has some initial angle from the vertical. Resonance
reduces this angle to some final angle. Let P be the initial angle and Q
be the final angle. The change in P.E. using P and Q is:
dE = (-BU cosP) - (-BU cosQ)
= BU(cosQ - cosP)
z = rcos Theta
where r lies along U and is equal to the radius of the sphere.
z < = rcos(zero).
dz = rcosP - rcosQ
= r(cosP - cosQ)
....Fz = -dE/dz = (-1) BU(cosQ - cosP)/r(cosP - cosQ)
= BU(cosP - cosQ)/r(cosP - cosQ)
= BU/r
....Fz is the force along +z, in the same direction as B. In ordinary
magnetism, the force is perpendicular to B. At first glance, BU/r
appears to be a static quantity.
No; it was the result of assuming at least some minimal change in the
angle that U makes with the vertical. B varies slightly in and out of
resonance, just enough to vary the angle, and the change in the cosines
cancel out, leaving BU/r. The magnitude of the precession (in angular
units) is:
Wp = yB where y = |e/m| in mks units
....For a field of 1 Tesla, Wp/2pi = 28Ghz
A modern EFR spectrometer uses a superconducting magnet and can easily
reach this field strength. Superconducting magnets can magnetize
ferromagnetic material when the material is used as shimming to
fine-tune the field.
U = MV
where M is the room temp. magnetz. of iron, 1.7x10 [37;44;1m A/m [40;1m
and V is the volume of the sphere.
[the preceding sentence is just as it was presented in the file, though
I think it is incorrect and should read thus;
where M is the room temperature,
magnetization of iron is 1.7x10 A/m (is this Amperes/meter?)
and V is the volume of the sphere. ]
The expression BU/r has a counterpart in the lower hemisphere of the
sphere. It is necessary to understand that U is related to the angular
momentum of the sphere, J. U and J are anti-parallel as vectors. U
precesses about +z and J, about -z. A process identical to that which
obtained Fz above, reduces to the following for the lower hemisphere:
Fz = WpJ/r
The force is in the same direction as BU/r. The total force in the +z
direction is either: BU/r or WpJ/r. As the angle between U and the
vertical varies, the angle between J and the vertical varies,
*identically*. Since BU/r = WpJ/r it is clear that without the
precession of U (and J) there can be no force.
The calculation of J is straight-forward:
J = U/y
....For a sphere 1 m [36;1m in volume, a quick analyis shows that the
magnitude of J is approx. 1 x 10^-5 kg-m [35;1m/s. But does angular
momentum always involve rotation of a physical body?
[ again, a probable transcription due to it being a word processing
graphics code, here is the most likely 'translation'
....For a sphere 1 m in volume, a quick analyis shows that the magnitude
of J is approx. 1 x 10^-5 kg-m/s. But does angular momentum always
involve rotation of a physical body? ]
Not according to the experimental findings of Noble and Trouton or those
of R. Tomaschek. They "showed that an angular momentum DOES NOT
NECESSARILY lead to a rotation of the body involved." The experiments
involved freely suspended electrically charged capacitors, which were
determined to possess angular momentum YET DID NOT ROTATE.
Sources
Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, P. Schilpp, editor, 3rd ed.,
1988, pp522-523.
Vonsovskii, S, Ferromagnetic Resonance, 1966.
...Feynman, R, Feynman Lectures on Physics, v2, 1964
Chikazumi, S, Physics of Magnetism, 1964
Soohoo, R, Microwave Magnetics, 1988
Herlach, F, Strong and Ultrastrong Magnetic Fields, 1985
=============================
Here is the MAIN file I wanted you to see, it was on the BBS as
DRIVE1.ASC;
SELF-SUSTAINED ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPULSION
or
'How to generate mechanical momentum from enclosed electromagnetic
energy only'
Patent Pending).
Michael J.G. Polonyi,
Consultant,
54-44 69th. St.,
Maspeth, NY 11378
According to Ref.1 and others, it is not possible to create mechanical
momentum from enclosed electromagnetic energy only :
'For it is an obvious postulate that in stationary state in which matter
is at rest and in which there are no waves escaping, there can be no
electromagnetic momentum'.
Still, this should be possible, and simpler than originally thought of :
Suppose we use Helmholtz coils arranged as two flat coils, separated to
a distance approximately equal to the radius of the coil. If an
alternating current is applied on each coil, an electromagnetic field
will be generated by each one.
So, an attraction and repulsion effect will appear at the frequency of
the applied currents and fields, on each coil, due to the field
generated by the other coil.
Now, the question arises: is it possible that, instead of the coils
attracting and repelling each other, both will exert a force in the same
direction?
In other words: if you mount them on a cart, will the cart move in
one direction ?
Apparently it is possible after all, at least theoretically, because
it is not the current but the FIELD generated by the said current that
reacts with the other coil, and, since it takes a certain amount of time
for the field to cross the space between the coils, it is just a matter
of finding an arrangement that will create a unidirectional force
condition.
Is there such a force condition ? Yes, and it is very simple :
If,
(a) the frequency is sufficiently high so that the distance
'D' between the coils will be a quarter of a wavelength,
(b) both fields are of the same frequency, and
(c) are in phase when they meet at one coil (they will be in
opposite phase when they reach the second coil),
then, a force will appear alternating on each coil but this force will
always point in the same direction,
since, one of the coils (the leading one) will always be 'pushed' by the
field of the lagging one, which in turn will always be 'pulled' by the
leading coil field.
....For clarity, see the following chart that corresponds to the
schematic further down :
| FIELD | FIELD | FIELD | FIELD | DIREC. | FORCE
Time | COIL1 | COIL1 | COIL2 | COIL2 | OF | ON
| POS.1 | POS.2 | POS.1 | POS.2 | FORCE | COIL #
-------------------------------------------------------
| | | | | |
0 | MAX | | | 0 | |
| | | | | |
D/C | 0 | MAX | 0 | MAX | + | 2
| | | | | |
2D/C | MIN | 0 | MAX | 0 | + | 1
| | | | | |
3D/C | 0 | MIN | 0 | MIN | + | 2
and so on ...
C : speed of the magnetic vector
D/C : quarter-wavelength travel time.
Now, to avoid electromagnetic radiation the assembly CAN BE ENCLOSED.
The enclosure will also affect the wavelength and force, depending on
the particular shape and quality of the enclosure.
But this also means that the electromagnetic energy is not radiated
(other than termal losses) and CAN BE RECIRCULATED i.e. an
'electromagnetic wheeling' effect.
This arrangement is similar to a directional coupler in microwave
technology, in which the electromagnetic energy propagates in one
direction only.
If the energy can propagate in one direction only in a closed waveguide,
then both ends of the waveguide can be joined in a ring-shape, and
consequently angular mechanical momentum can be generated at will.
Obviously:
(a) ANY TWO ELECTROMAGNETIC SOURCES, OUT-OF-PHASE IN TIME AND SPACE WILL
GIVE YOU THIS EFFECT. The force will be maximum when the sources are a
quarter of a wavelength appart, in space and time.
(b) It can be enclosed in a metal box of any shape, something very
similar to a resonant cavity, which in turn SHOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE.
(c) When the fields are in-phase there is no resultant force but an
increase in electromagnetic mass !
As far as the calculations go, here is some preliminary:
coil1 coil2
------------|----------------------|------------------------> x
x=0 x=c/4f
c = field propagation velocity
f = field frequency
coil 1 : H1 = I1 sin wt
coil 2 : H2 = I2 cos wt
___
distance : c/4f = // /2 ; i.e. quarter-wavelength
___
....Field H1 at coil 2: H12 = I1 sin (wt - // /2) = I1 (-cos wt)
2
....Force at coil 2 : F2 = u H12 * H2 = - u I1 I2 cos wt
This expression says that coil2 will always feel attracted, or pulled by
coil 1.
___
....Field H2 at coil 1: H21 = - I2 cos(wt - // /2) = -I2 sin wt
is negative because it travels in the opposite direction.
2
....Force at coil 1 : F1 = u H1 * H21 = - u I1 I2 sin wt
I.e.: coil1 always feels repelled, or pushed, by coil2.
Ergo, a unidirectional force !
To concentrate the field and avoid magnetic lines dispersion, a core or
nucleus of magnetic material can be used to improve the force effect.
The magnetic material will then slow down the propagation of the
magnetic field waves, therefore allowing a decrease, either of the
frequency or the distance between coils.
This core also behaves very much like a 'resonant cavity'. For enclosed
electromagnetic fields, the electromagnetic force equation in integral
form can be used (Ref.2).
The magnitude of the forces involved is very small, therefore it is
difficult to set up an experiment that will demonstrate the principle,
since very high frequencies and fields are necessary.
....For two coils mounted on a ferrite antenna core, with a relative
permeability of 10, separated 6 cm, 28.2 ampturn at 395 MHZ and 156
ohms/turn are needed to generate 1 Newton ! This is 124 kVA ! plus
losses.
But, according to the 'Principle of Equivalence' if it is possible to
create a force, in space, from enclosed electromagnetic energy only, it
should be possible to create the inverse, i.e. electromagnetic energy
from a 'force field'.
In a previous work by this author (Ref.3), it was suggested that the
'electromagnetic momentum density' was the (missing) link between
mechanics and electrodynamics.
This would suggest in turn, that gravitation is nothing else than
'phase waves', similar to the ones that develop in microwave guides and
resonant cavities.
But for 'phase waves' to exist, there must be an electromagnetic
field of that frequency present already.
This, in turn, brings us back to the concept of 'ether', and that all
mass, even the whole universe is probably nothing else but a gigantic
'resonant cavity'. A very powerful concept.
In (4) it is claimed, that an experiment has been set-up that can
measure absolute velocities, and explains why the Michelson-
Morley experiment fails to do so. This, in turn, would be
complementary proof of the above, the existence of an 'ether'.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vanguard Notes
A physicist named Dr. Dan Fry once wrote a book (called 'the White Sands
Incident') claiming that he had the privilege of riding in what he was
told was a spaceship.
His background gave him a superb chance to observe the alien flight
systems which he reported on in his book, "To Men of Earth".
He claimed that the spaceship used two coils, one mounted in the top
center of the ship, the other in the bottom center.
When the coils were excited at their resonant frequency, the focal point
of the magnetic field created an "artificial Neutral Centre" which could
be so adjusted as to pull the ship in the direction of the artificial
center.
The natural neutral centre of the ship had no choice but to follow, much
like a child sitting in a wagon attached to a goat, donkey or dog.
When the child holds a carrot or other food in front of the animal, the
animal follows thereby pulling the wagon wherever the child wanted.
I suggest you study the work of John W. Keely to further understand the
properties of the Neutral Centre. That is the main purpose of the
KeelyNet, to disseminate, learn for ourselves and help others to learn
of the work of Keely. If you have any thoughts on these matters, we
would appreciate discussing them with you.
------------------------------------------------------------
References :
(1) Casimir, H.B.G., 'ON ELECTROMAGNETIC MOMENTUM AND PONDEROMOTRIC
....FORCES', Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Proc. B
(Netherlands), Vol.75, No.1, 6-11, 1972.
(2) Paris D.T. and Hurd F.K., 'BASIC ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY. McGraw-Hill
Book Co., 1969, Chapter 6, p.290. eq 6-51.
(3) Polonyi, M.J.G., 'ELECTRODYNAMICS, INERTIA AND GRAVITATION : a
unfying approach', Speculations in Science and Technology, Vol.10, No.2
page 145, 9/1987.
(4) Silvertooth, E.W., 'EXPERIMENTAL DETECTION OF THE ETHER',
Sppeculations in Science and Technology, Vol.10, N0.1, p.3, 1987.
-- Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker@keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187