Is anyone here investigating known laws of physics or going beyond these ? Do we really care what physic laws tell us if we may discover they don't apply in certain conditions ?

Something is utterly wrong with @kampen pre-conclusions and not conclusions after test run. On top of altering the setup description ... and definitely is not first time I have observed this.

Call me out or ban me from the forum but, I won't stop to say the obvious or what I truly believe is the truth.

https://youtu.be/pCzPSvL4C_o?si=Q7-Jg-kGgFxHZT90

As a long time member of this group and the previous one and being a follower and an on-again, off-again builder I find it disheartening to see this cycle of discouragement occurring again.  We have seen this happen several times before.  

Ufopolitics has had the drive and enthusiasm to build and maintain this website and allow us all to participate and share our findings and experience and share our expertise in specific areas. He has made it quite clear what the goals and rules are on this site.

We are again reaching a point of a major test point/phase and we need to conduct the tests and see the results.  In the past the tests results were never quite the results we wanted, but we learned and moved on.  As anyone in R&D knows, there are many iterations and refinements in the development process.

Let's not divert our energies in another "food fight" like has happened in the past.

Reply to message # 492

Hello dear friend, Ufopolitics,

Thank you for the detailed clarification this helps greatly in understanding how you are framing the method and, in particular, what you mean by "NO moving mass" and "field displacement through spacetime."

If I may restate your idea in engineering terms to be sure I understand it correctly:

You are not referring to eliminating electromagnetic energy flow, but specifically eliminating mechanical motion of rotors, conductors, and massive steel cores.

The inducing magnetic field B is created electrically and remains constant in polarity and magnitude.

Induction occurs because the spatial distribution of B changes with time, not because B itself reverses or collapses.

In other words, induction is produced by a controlled translation of flux density through space as a function of time, rather than by alternating polarity or changing field strength.

Stated this way, the concept aligns with known electromagnetic principles:
Faraday induction depends on time-varying flux linkage, not necessarily on polarity reversal or mechanical motion.
A field that is spatially displaced relative to a conductor will still induce EMF, even if its local magnitude and orientation remain constant.

From that perspective, what you are calling "spacetime displacement" can be understood as:

Spatial parameter where the field exists relative to the windings.
Time parameter how fast that spatial distribution is shifted.

Taken together, this is equivalent to a travelling or migrating magnetic field, which is a real and well-established electromagnetic phenomenon.

Your point that the driver itself is secondary is also well taken.
Whether the sequencing is achieved by:
mechanical commutation (as in Figuera's original design), relays, bipolar electronic switching,
or MOSFET-based drivers,
the essential requirement is that the field never collapses to zero, and that continuity of flux is preserved while its position changes.

From an engineering standpoint, this is a critical distinction and explains why conductive or ferromagnetic "anchors" (such as aluminum rings or inner steel clamps) are so detrimental these resist or damp that spatial flux movement.

I also agree that there is no fundamental requirement for the displacement to be purely linear.
A travelling field can be:
linear, rotary, or follow more complex 3D trajectories,
as long as the system maintains:
flux continuity,
controlled sequencing,
and predictable spatial gradients.

Where the experimental work becomes especially important is in demonstrating that:
the field magnitude truly remains constant during displacement,
the flux path is not being unintentionally shorted, damped, or reshaped by nearby materials, and the induced output scales consistently with displacement frequency and geometry.

Clarifying these points experimentally will make it much easier for others to follow, reproduce, and evaluate the method without misunderstanding it as polarity reversal or conventional AC excitation.

Thank you again for the clarification this helps focus the discussion on the method of field displacement, rather than on the specific choice of driver or mechanical analogy.

Regards, Alex

Hello All,

@Classic &  @greybeardmike , please friends, I will like to ask you two to "cool it off"!

@kampen is just trying to find an Engineering and Scientific standpoint as a detailed description and proof of this New Method, in order for others to easily apply it to the respective fields (engineering, physics, science)

I am so sure of my development here, that I can take any questions or doubts from anyone that would be requesting an answer...

As I am sure there would be more questions, once I start testing my device...

Regards to All

Ufopolitics 

Hello All,

On this post I want to go -in detail- (by disecting/braking down) the Math on my development, compared to Faraday Induction Law Formula:

𝜉 = −𝑁 𝛥𝛷𝐵/𝛥𝑡

Above is Faraday Induction Law Formula:

Where:

1-  𝜉 is the Induced EMF

2-  𝑁 is the number of Wire Conductor Turns relating to the Inducing Field

3-  𝛥𝛷 is the Change in Flux (the Delta Symbol 𝛥 means 'Variation, Change') of the Inducing Field.

4-  𝐵 relates to the Inducing Magnetic Field as 'B'

5-  𝛥𝑡 represents Time Variation, Change, where  𝛥 again, means Change, Variation as 𝑡 means Time (also related to the Inducing Field).

6- The Negative sign −  in front of the Right side of Equation represents Lenz Law applied.

Resuming, that Faraday Equation means that the Induced EMF is dependent of ALL the Components on the Right Side of the 'Equal Sign' of Equation., which basically relates to the Inducing Magnetic Field.

To put it on simple Terms, the Equation have on Left side the INDUCED FIELD RESULT as EMF obtained (𝜉) , as on the Right of the Equal Sign, it has ALL the Components 'required' on the INDUCING FIELD SIDE to generate an Electromagnetic Induction  𝜉 .



On my development the  𝛥𝛷 or Flux Variation (Field Strength) is NOT APPLIED (N/A) related to 𝐵 as the INDUCING or EXCITING Field 'B' keeping its Strength equal during all the Induction Process.
The Combined FULL TERM: 𝛥𝛷𝐵 means there is considered a 'Flux Change' or 'Variation' of FIELD STRENGTH on 'B'.

On the Method/Tech presented here, there is absolutely ZERO VARIATION of the INDUCING Field Strength, remaining the same, during the whole operation of this Linear Generator presented here.

If we take off the Equation the Variation of Field B strength by varyng its Flux:  𝛥𝛷𝐵...

Then we are left with'Time Variation' "under" or divided by 𝛥𝑡 which does NOT make any sense without Flux Variation above...

If you all can notice, on Faraday Equation is NOT included the parameter "SPACE" given by Volume of the 3D coordinates of the Field B, meaning: Length, Width and Height.

Now, when we include (and replace) the parameter 'Spacetime' we are comprehending the FOURTH DIMENSIONS by including 'Time' as the Fourth Dimension, added to the other Three (3) Dimensions which relates to Field 3D Volume.

QuoteSpacetime is the unified, four-dimensional fabric of the universe, combining the three dimensions of space (length, width, height) with the single dimension of time, as described by Einstein's relativity.

Then, allow me to introduce -for this New Method/Technology- this New Parameter to the Faraday Equation:

𝛥 B spacetime

Which simply means the Variation of Field B through Spacetime, without varying -at all- it's Flux, which will remain CONSTANT as represented by FIELD STRENGTH.

This component  𝛥 B spacetime includes the Variation of Time, as well as the Variation of Field COORDINATES through Space, ALL in ONE simple line.

Now, the only "confusion" that can arise from above mathematical function is to understand that we are varying the Field Volume (3D) over time, as part of the Variation of Spacetime process...which is FALSE.

On this New Method, the Field 'B' and its 3D SPACE (Volume), ONLY displaces over ONE (1) of the Three (3) Dimensional Coordinates x, y, z, keeping the other Two Coordinates of the same value and Space Positioning, during its Operation for Induction generation.
Therefore, we need to incorporate the B VECTOR or the DIRECTION OF MOTION related to the Variation of Spacetime:  𝐵⃗
Then we have:  𝛥𝐵⃗spacetime
This way we can easily understand the Variation 𝛥 of Directional  𝐵⃗ Field through Spacetime.

As the FULL Equation for this New Method of Induction should look like this:


I will add some 3D Graphics later on, or tomorrow, to better 'view' this development on a 3D Geometrical View. (ALL 3 Axis of 3D [x, y, z] plus Time [t] as the Fourth Dimension)

Regards to All

Ufopolitics