Electromagnetic Generator Theory

[Dr.Wlazlak]

Electromagnetic generator Theory? 
I seen this Pop up to the top again, Wondering what part is the Theory part?
Again I have a handbook from 1933 standard handbook for electrical engineers that tells everything one wishes to know
as Facts on Transformers, Generators, Electromagnetic Coils - all electrical applications ( not as theory but as facts ) 
where testing on every aspect of all these systems were in depth covers every possible way on how these things work
and the Physics behind them things also.

What is said is a transformer as the best possible device for transfer of electrical energy can only be 99 percent total 
all other electrical devices as less than 99 percent input to output 

But it is fun to see people try to outwit the balance of the universe 

I have failed to produce a workable device many times in the past learning what is possible and what is not possible to use
as a medium as to produce a workable device, That runs on its own power sources meaning it takes 2 at least to make a 1 workable output system that can itself and other things - I don't use theory in doing this - because if it is theory -
it means theory - is just guessing - not a real anything - and a not a real anything means - not a chance of working -

So saying: The Electromagnetic Generator Theory - means - NOT real from the start ---  ( just a thought ) 

Water seeks it own level, electrical energy does the same thing, plus electrical power is only 1 energy - like using gravity only - This type never works - because it is mostly only 1 input for 1 output minus friction = less than 99 percent every time- again ( balance of the universe - can't beat it - ) But!
The fact is there is no electromagnetic theory - just not knowing a guessing what the mystery of how electric makes magnetic things work that why they seem to do what they seem to do. 

I find it better if the facts are written down somewhere, Old books on subjects in questions are the best - new books seem to have missing pages where the knowledge was but has been removed mainly to keep people guessing ( I guess? )

As far as I know the only non-balanced part of the universe was that Big Bang thing after that - everything is just seeking its own level 

But that is only a Theory - of course

din ma - and good luck  

[rakarskiy]

Interesting question, someone thinks that an electromagnetic generator is not an overunity. A transformer cannot be an overunity because it is a device that converts an alternating voltage from one level to another (higher/lower). A transformer is not a voltage source. It is an element of the electrical circuit between the source and the load.

Converters are not necessarily inductive, there are also capacitive and the same multiplier.

If we consider an electric circuit, the level of electric induction (EMF), which manifests itself in the form of electric potential difference, is spent on the load of the circuit, transforming into electromagnetic radiation, and in fact: when the line of electric induction (E) is closed, it is transformed into a power line of magnetic induction (B). All this is beautifully seen in the solution of a simple problem. Thus, in an electric circuit with a load, the condition of the principle of conservation of equality of conversion parameters (what you call the law of conservation of energy) is completely fulfilled. For reference, there are also mechanical single-anchor converters (analogous to a static transformer), but they are not generator devices; they still need to be made as such.

But with an electromagnetic generator this principle is not completely fulfilled. First, mechanical power ( P=Fv ) can in no way be transformed into electrical power (W=IU). Can you clarify how it is converted, because physics states that this is a constant. In simple terms, transformation is work, and the performance of work should be considered as the power expended multiplied by the time it takes to perform it. Power multiplied by time is energy.

Even Lorentz's rule that he derived mathematically from Ampere's law has more inconsistencies than proofs, but orthodox physics takes Lorentz's rule as a constant. It looks like a square bucket stretched over a globe.

Let's take an ordinary synchronous alternator. The simplest, the turbo generator, though huge, is the simplest in principle. We all know that for a mechanical alternator to work, it is necessary to rotate the magnetic rotor in the stator with phase windings. Electricity generation is the action of forming an electromotive force at the ends of the phase winding of the stator. E= - dΦ/dt * N. Physics defines two ways: a) when cutting the magnetic lines of force of the conductor [E = BmLv] and when changing the magnetic induction in the magnetic circuit in which the conductor is located [E=4.44Φf]. The rotor of a turbogenerator is a permanent electromagnet that forms a constant magnetic flux with poles, which closes through the stator core. When the rotor rotates in the stator, the register position of the closed magnetic fluxes changes in relation to the phase conductor in the stator. The phenomenon of electromagnetic induction occurs and at the ends of the phase we measure the EMF in the form of the difference in electrical potentials. We make this measurement even without closing the circuit with the load. The physical power of rotation is minimal and is practically equal to the friction costs of the system.



Thus, physical rotation is not energy (power) that is transformed, but a condition for the movement of the magnetic rotor in the stator. Thus, we took the square bucket (mechanical force) of the constant of physics from the globe (electromagnetic induction) and separated the two elements at the corners. Next, we will consider the electrical costs for the excitation of the magnetic field in the turbogenerator to the output power of the generator.

There is no such information on the English-language Wikipedia page (  Turbo generator - Wikipedia ).  Let's look at the information in the Ukrainian version (  Турбогенератор — Вікіпедія )

In the excitation section we find information:
Excitation is very important for generator operation because the excitation current setting controls the final voltage ramp. ... For turbogenerators, the excitation power is approximately 0.5% to 3% of the generator power. ....

Interesting data, isn't it? Let's exclude the costs of mechanical rotation of the rotor and calculate the conversion efficiency using the electromagnetic induction phenomenon, at 3% it's not difficult, the conversion efficiency will be 3333%.

Today, no one knows whether magnetic induction is spent on the formation of electromotive force in the conductor, therefore, it is inappropriate to apply the law of conservation of energy to this action. When the load is connected, a current is formed in the secondary circuit, which forms its own source of magnetic field. Breaking two fields between the rotor and stator costs mechanical costs equal to the generated electrical power. If you make the generator incorrectly, then your mechanical costs for rotating the magnetic rotor will be 1.5 or 2 times greater than the electrical power you receive for the consumer. 

Let's say you know how to organize the rotation of the rotor's magnetic poles (with a constant magnetic field) without physically rotating the rotor core. You will get a stationary alternating current generator. That's what the brilliant Spanish engineer Clemente Figuera did in 1902. Only a hundred years later, ideas appeared to implement this simple design. Do you believe it? I don't believe it, rather, everything connected with it was suppressed.[/color]

Static electromagnetic generators of Clemente Figueras, Robert Holcomb, Park Jae-Sun and Shoji Haneda. | Patreon


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

My article is about another interesting electromagnetic converter.


Richard WILLIS * Magnacoaster | Patreon

   

[Dr.Wlazlak]

Hello interesting formula E = 4.444 (flux in Maxwell) * ( Magnetomotive force in Gilbert )

Because if 4.444 is part of the formula in that is similar to the same thing as (E = mc2 * 4.444)
or W = I * E * Hz. 
or E = W * time 

Somehow extra thing numbers are being placed in formula's to get the answers people wish would be real

above f = flux in Maxwell ( formula ) f = 4 (pi) N I ( notice the flux formula of f already consist of having ( 4 ) in the formula
that (4) makes the f = f already ---
 putting ( 4.444 ) more times in the formula is like ( magic adding numbers that came from the Big bang or some big something added to the formula that is not needed ( or is it just to add confusion ) 

Well: I would say ( do it, or don't do it but, do it, because you ( want it more than something real ) A theory maybe?

or why not just make a working thing using 4.444 more in the real world ( talking about it, Is easy ) making the real idea work is somewhat more Real, 

When I was in math class a long time ago the teacher showed how do a formula that can make 1 = 2 by 
multiplying apples and oranges together ( of course in the real world GMO"s do just that ) 

SO: never mind : The Cat covered it poop 

TW

[rakarskiy]

You have a mess in your head. You did it on purpose or for some other reason, I don't care.
Faraday's formula for electromagnetic induction has the form

Firstly, the formula for the energy of a moving mass E=mc^2 is also called the equivalence of mass and energy, the formula for mechanical energy E = 1/2 mv^2 The formula E=mc^2 was first written as E=kmc^2, even before Einstein, where k is the coefficient of the medium in which the mass has movement.  What you wrote indicates a complete ignorance of the subject, and work for an uneducated crowd.  They probably wanted to make an impression.
Faraday's formula for electromagnetic induction [EMF] is: 


The emf generated by Faraday's law of induction due to relative movement of a circuit and a magnetic field is the phenomenon underlying electrical generators. When a permanent magnet is moved relative to a conductor, or vice versa, an electromotive force is created. If the wire is connected through an electrical load, current will flow, and thus electrical energy is generated, converting the mechanical energy of motion to electrical energy. For example, the drum generator is based upon the figure to the bottom-right. A different implementation of this idea is the Faraday's disc, shown in simplified form on the right.
A rectangular wire loop rotating with angular velocity ω in a radially outward magnetic field B of fixed magnitude. The circuit terminates in brushes sliding on upper and lower discs with conductive rims. This is a simplified version of the drum generator.



To calculate the EMF when a conductor moves in a magnetic field, the following formula is:    [E = Bℓv*sin(a)]

For the frame generator of such machines as the Dynamo Gramme, other dynamos where the conductor is wound over the iron core of the anchor, this formula is completely fulfilled. But in the force of the mechanical force of rotation of the anchor when current occurs in the wires of the frame winding, this is another phenomenon not related to the constant of physics, cho the generator is a converter of mechanical energy into electrical energy.

My publication is absolutely free for study: ELECTRODYNAMICS OVER UNITY * DC MOTORS AND GENERATORS  or  OVER UNITY ELECTRODYNAMICS - DC MOTOR and GENERANOR

In the book I give an example of another phenomenon related to the induction of EMF on a conductor, when the conductor is in the focus of a closed magnetic flux, which changes its magnetic density. In this case, the physically closed lines of magnetic induction do not intersect the conductor. I first published my guess in my article:

The invention of the electromagnetic generator | Patreon

Later, a physicist from the USA wrote to me on one of the physics forums that everything I had stated was not a discovery, it had long been known, it was just studied only by those physicists and engineers who were concerned. Changing the curriculum for 99% of students or electrical engineers (mostly designers) does not make sense, since it will not affect their professional activities. However, having learned what I was doing, she broke off contact with me and deleted all posts from the correspondence. One of the screenshots is in this thread. She also gave me links to Wikipedia, where the American version is published: Anapoles moment (Toroidal moment) and change in anapole moment (Dynamic toroidal dipole).

I made a slide showing how the phenomenon is applied to electromagnetic induction in a generator with a closed magnetic circuit.



Another slide for the two types of closed-flux electromagnetic generators.



This slide contains a solution to how the coefficient 4.44 arises in the transformer EMF formula.

___________________________________________

The figure on the left applies to all generators where there is a closed magnetic flux. Turbo generators, which are installed in power plants, have a direct relationship. This is most likely the principle by which Figuer's generator was created, the technology of which he sold in 1902:

Static electromagnetic generators of Clemente Figueras, Robert Holcomb, Park Jae-Sun and Shoji Haneda. | Patreon

The picture on the right is of a switched flux generator: Flux switching alternator - Wikipedia

Motors and Generators using magnetic flux switching | Patreon

By the way, the Flux switching alternator is one of the types of machines that is not taught to everyone, but to a special category in the USA or the former USSR. Joe Flynn, after demonstrating his motors and generators, came under the surveillance of the US government and died under unknown circumstances in 2021. In Russia, engineer Kornilov also died under strange circumstances in December 2021. In one night, he was forcibly taken to the hospital allegedly with coronavirus and died before the morning. That same night, his technical laboratory was looted and the finished sample of a 70 kW self-propelled motor-generator disappeared.

[Dr.Wlazlak]

interesting these people are dead now - maybe they had the wrong friends -- 
But normally to say something is a Sample - I really have to see such things in person and test the systems
for myself before I say one way or the other ( Sample of a something 70 kw thing that ran some way some how ) Saying self propelled could mean - runs on and input from a power source using others energy -
or anything - So: vague - ( Well: I think ) 
The drawing above is a prototype motor that only produces 230 watts output 
but only uses 70 watts to do so
interesting enough - I did not need to calculate using formulas to produce this technology -
simple real testing on the electromagnetic coils was enough to see if it would work or not 

As for doing something on purpose - I always do things on purpose - It makes people think - if nothing else --
just pisses them off --  People that is - dogs just like to fetch if a stick is tossed on purpose -
I guess people do the same - when such thing happen - 

Always - Fun stuff - din ma - Moss - Wait that is the other guy - Oh well: don't really matter at least they got those others guy's technology seeing how they- them - ones dead did not need it any more. 
Always so good comes out of bad things happening ) I guess? 

Think of the bright side ( your post is staying at the top of the pole chart on this forum for now )