I am not in agreement with Bedini's conclusion. My understanding of the
Block Wall is that it occurs WITHIN ferromagnetic materials and demarks the
boundary between two different polarisation areas or layers. If you take a
horseshoe magnet and lay a keeper across the poles in the Gary
configuration (horseshoe shaped keeper) then the iron of the keeper acts as
an extention of the magnet poles ie: the north magnet pole induces a north
magnetic pole on its keeper pole. As the keeper is moved away from the
magnet there is a point reached where the keeper poles no longer act as an
extention of the magnet, but rather as a short circuit bridge for the
magnetic flux across the magnet poles. In this position the keeper poles
sign is opposite that of the magnet poles. Somewhere in between these two
positions lies the neutral line, where the keeper is caught between being
an extention of the magnet and a flux return path. The keeper exibits
neither an effective north or south pole magnetic orientation - it is
neutral. The distance that the keeper travels, from one magnetic
orientation to the other across the neutral line, can be very small. Gary
claims distances of 1 mm or less of movement to switch the keeper field -
from my observations this is correct. A small movement of the keeper gives
rise to a large force reaction which, it is claimed, is captured to do work.
I've played with ferrofluids like the one you outlined. Visually
fascinating with a multitude of uses but, IMHO, no good for balancing a
Gary mechanism. Best to get a feel for the materials and visualise in your
head. You know what they say, the best computing/visualisation device you
have is right between your ears. <g>
Regards, Bill.
At 23:03 5/08/98 -0500, donadams wrote:
>Hi Bill, enjoyed hearing about your experiments with the Gary
>Motor...I've been following it for a while now... quite dissapointed
>that no ones duplicated it yet. Bendini claims the 'neutral line'
>is simply the bloch wall? Whats you take on that?
>
>Your comment regarding contemporary magnets being too powerful made
>and it seems it may be rather difficult to acquire suitable
>weaker ones.
>
>I had an idea though that I think might really speed progress up
>in regards to researching Gary's device. Since its the balancing
>and timing of the component parts to get it the oscillation to occur...
>what if instead of spending months or years just manually trying
>different distances and balancing acts with the parts, you took a
>shortcut and cheated?
>
>What I mean is, couldn't you simply sink the entire contraption
>into a large clear tank filled with something like mineral oil,
>then dump in a bunch of finely ground iron filings. Let the filings
>create a 3 dimensional pattern around the magnets indicating the field
>paths. Then as you begin to adjust the component parts you could easily
>and simply see field effects and distortions occur in the fields as you
>moved the parts about? Couldn't a person use this to precisely target
>exactly where an adjustment should be made since you could clearly see
>it take effect? I'm not sure if this sounds lame or not... just
>guessing. Forgive my pedestrian knowledge about such things... it
>just seemed to make sense at the time? Besides I remember seeing
>a cool online site that showed how a magnets field could be seen in 3-D
>when it was sunk into such a chamber. It was quite amazing to look at!
>I had thought of doing the above on my own experiments with the Gary
>motor... even bought the oil, filings and I even have tiny weak horseshoe
>magnets... just haven't had the time yet, sigh!
>
>
>Don