 |
There are currently, 149 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N
Posted on Tuesday, April 03, 2007 @ 20:39:32 UTC by vlad
|
|
Modernsteam writes: It appears that SuperVision is still proceeding apace with development of its SuperMag 10-Kw magnet-based electrical generator. Steorn of Dublin, MPI of California, D2Fusion, BlackLight Power of New Jersey, and other over-unity technology developers should take notice. However, Steorn has said that its "Orbo" system, now under evaluation by "Third Party" scientists and engineers, should have its initial testing completed by December of this year, at which time the test results would be published. Rumour has it on one of the blogs, though, that Steorn is planning to demonstrate one of their devices this July. SuperVision said it expects the SuperMag machine to be demonstrated in California "soon", before thousands of scientists, engineers, and potential investors.
The SuperMag seems tentatively to be very credible, because a SuperMag artificial heart derivative has been "installed" in a patient in Montreal, and there has not been an announcement that it has failed. SuperVision, the device's parent, also has an excellent money-making record with Video-on-Demand and other electronic entertainment products.
I report with a fair amount of enthusiasm on developments with SuperMag or any other Free Energy device which claims significant progress. That does not mean I hold claims, such as those above, as necessarily true. I'm "on the fence" until I at least receive information from a reliable source, such as a conservative, "down-to-Earth" newspaper (if there are any left), or witnessing scientists/engineers skeptical and knowledgeable enough to know how to check for fraud and hoaxes, that a device has operated self-running under a hefty load for a length of time sufficient to dispell any suspicion that less total energy has been output from a system than the operator or feedback mechanism has input.
SuperVision began its latest series of announcements with this item for March 26:
http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_ge.jsp?news_id=iwr-0230615&feed=iwr&date=20070326
Here's the April 2 announcement of its 20 mill. candlepower breakthrough:
http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_ge.jsp?news_id=iwr-0233649&feed=iwr&date=20070402
I'm still a reason-based Free Energy "true believer", but have, for the time-being, become quite skeptical of pure permanent-magnet type rotary devices based only on the geometrical arrangements of permanent magnets. I tentatively accept the conclusions of certain of the more open-minded scientists/engineers who have noted that the best of these machines rotate in an apparent self-running manner - the best-known being those of Newman, Muller, and Adams - only to slow down under load after a time, because, I believe, the permanent magnets have gradually given up their coherent electron spin to the opposing load - Newton's Third Law of Motion:Action/Reaction - and lose their magnetism over time. I believe that in such "pure" cases, P-M fields are not being manipulated or interacted with each other to extract energy from the vacuum, as in the SuperMag, the Orbo, and MPI's Magnetic Power Modules, and the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics apply, as they do most of the time: Energy is Conserved, and is dissipated through entropy. It takes work to magnetize material by aligning magnetic domains and effecting same-direction electron spin. If we consider such coherent spinning electrons as nano-scale "flywheels" which can power a load at a distance, rather than through contact, we can understand that the most we'd extract for work would be the total amount of energy used to magnetize the material, minus losses through heat, friction etc. In such a "simple" case, permanent magnetic energy in a magnetic field, is depleted when used to do work, or wasted as losses.
Less I depress my fellow F-E enthusiasts too much, the good news, as I see it, is that permanent magnet fields don't have to do much work to bring forth more energy than the operator inputs. To use Tom Bearden's term, "rigourously", these fields can act just as tools. They'd not themselves be working a load, giving up their uni-directional electron spins to randomization under load stress. Instead, I understand the fields of two or more magnets can be manipulated by interacting one field relative to the other, - could we say an extension of Farady's *changing* a magnetic field relative to a conductor, - sometimes to get a "beat" frequency like two out-of-tune piano or guitar strings, or simply to "jolt" a local piece of energetic vacuum (space) though astute pulsing by engineering pulse amplitude, width, rest time between pulses, and pulse shape (Have I missed any parameters?). If done right - and this is where the intellectual property aspect comes in - the end result would be to "grab" some virtual electrons, positrons, photons, other "virtual" particles, or some of the Heavyside vectored magnetic field onto a "cross-section" of electric or magnetic charges, increasing the potential or voltage of these charges, or magnetic field strength, and into a magnetic or electric circuit, to do work on a load. There'd be enough excess to feed back to the front of the system to continue the pulsing or magnetic field interaction - ie., self-powering!
On the matter of potential or voltage, I'd hope every person, especially young people, interested in engineering physics, would ask this:"With a step-up Stanley-type transformer, notwithstanding that current is reduced and energy out equals energy in minus losses, why does an increased number of turns in the output coil result in increased voltage, and given that, where did the increased voltage come from?"
Hal Ade.
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
Average Score: 1.4
Votes: 5
| |
|
| "March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N" | Login/Create an Account | 12 comments | Search Discussion |
|
| | The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
|
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
Re: March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N (Score: 1)
by Light1 on Wednesday, April 04, 2007 @ 13:22:03 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | One could also add, "where does the instantaneous voltage come from that initially opposes the flow of current into the transformer?" We call this effect "inductance," and write it off as completely understood just because we have a name for it.
If and when a pure magnets-only motor is available for test and analysis, it should be relatively simple to determine if the energy stored in the magnetic fields of the magnets is being dissipated in the form of work output of the motor. My hunch is that there is no direct one-to-one relationship. Otherwise, what's the point? Just run your motor off a battery and be done with it.
Your point, however, is that there may be a more complex relationship, involving forced mechanical re-ordering of the magnetic domains over a long period of time, maybe exacerbated by vibration and overheating. However, as long as the energy balance remains favorable, it's still all good. |
|
|
Please investigate deeper when you cover Supervision, etc. (Score: 1)
by vlad on Wednesday, April 04, 2007 @ 19:51:34 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | Dave writes: Hi,
You and/ or 'Modernsteam' made it sound like Supervision's magnetic
technology was behind the turbine heart assist implant at McGill
University. If you read SuperVision's press release carefully
(http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/061218/0195689.html), you would have to
consider the liklihood that the medical device had nothing to do with
SuperMag technology. Supervision seems to have taken this story and, in
manipulative fashion, made it sound like it was their technology. I
feel quite sure they are deceiving people on this particulary story
(which would have to cause one to consider that the whole thing might
be a farce) so I will not investigate further. But you can and should
because if you do not examine more critically you will lead many people
astray and that would be your responsibility.
You can start by calling
Dr.Renzo Cecere who is the Director of the Mechanical Heart Assist
Program and McGill University HC surgical director of the Heart Failure
and Heart Transplant program at 1-514-934-4411. I believe the extension
is 31463. If Dr. Cecere or some other source confirms that the device
had nothing to do with SuperMag or SuperVision Entertainment, what will
you do about it?
You may want to start by contacting California"s Attorney General. If
this as a fraud, then they have already taken a lot of people to the
cleaners. I see where their stock hit $2 a share on the pink sheets.
Thank you,
dave |
|
|
Re: March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N (Score: 1)
by Mar1 on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 @ 12:15:53 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | Supervision Entertainment Inc. the supposed company behind the Supermag magnetic electric generator is primarily involved in the entertainment industry, it seems very strange indeed that the company would enter into the alternative energy business rubric.
In this article they state that they had entered into a contractual agreement for 11.5 million US dollars with a private environmental investment company named TSG based in Canada, well I found the website for this company at the following link, http://www.tsgcanada.ca/ [www.tsgcanada.ca] and all I can say is that this company is involved in the environmental regulatory consulting business specializing in various chemical business sectors such as pesticides, disinfectants, cosmetics Etc., but they don’t claim to be a private investment company targeting environmental technology as claimed by Supervision Entertainment Inc.
In this article they claim that a magnetic pump that uses the same or similar technology as the Supermag was used as an artificial heart which was successfully transplanted into a 65 year old patient by the name of Gerard Langevin at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal Canada by Dr. Renzo Cecere. This article is grossly misleading, first of all they fail to mention the company responsible for the technology, which is a company called Thoratec Corporation. The company can be located at the following link, http://www.thoratec.com/index.htm [www.thoratec.com]. The name of the pump installed is the Heartmate II (LVAS) which stands for left ventricular assist system, which they also fail to mention and to complicate maters even more this system uses a battery pack to power the system and as if this wasn’t enough the Heartmate II is really completely irrelevant to the Supermag, the product that has some relevance is called the Heartmate III which still has not gone through any clinical trials and has not been transplanted into anyone as of yet. The only reason why the Heartmate III is relevant is because it is a magnetically suspended centrifugal blood pump and by the way it also uses a battery pack, so I will let all of you be the judge as to whether or not this is deceitful to the point of nearly being able to claim fraud.
The other article that troubled me was released on December 12 2006, where they claim that a company by the name of Enigma G.C. had entered into an agreement with them for 35.5 million U.S dollars. This company’s website can be found at the following link, http://www.enigmagc.com/index.htm [www.enigmagc.com]. This company is a credit card processing company, what in God’s good name are they doing thinking about putting 35.5 dollars into technology that is totally irrelevant to their line of business, once again as in the first article I fail to see the connection.
Now I am not claiming that what they are saying regarding the Supermag is impossible, given that their system does seems to involve the manipulation of very powerful magnetic fields acting over or affecting diamagnetic materials to induce motion. This is a little more credible in the sense that it is not your typical claim involving equal polarity magnets and nothing more, remember that the problem with these systems has always been “magnetic lock up” , but diamagnetic materials don’t present this challenge because they never seek to realign they selves with the magnet exerting a force against it.
So my advice is be very and I mean extremely cautious regarding this company, if you are thinking about investing in it, wait until the technology is displayed at the Southern California Investment Association further on this year and if you are very interested go and witness the technology yourself before placing a penny in this thing. In what concerns me, I am extremely disappointed in their deceitful nature and shady information advertised by company through www.marketwire.com [www.marketwire.com]. That’s all folks, and I really hope I am wrong.
|
- Re: March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N by Mar1 on Saturday, April 21, 2007 @ 11:07:15 UTC
- Re: Mar1 SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy . . . by irjsi on Saturday, April 21, 2007 @ 13:57:14 UTC
- Re: March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N by modernsteam on Monday, April 23, 2007 @ 08:30:48 UTC
- Re: March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N by modernsteam on Monday, April 23, 2007 @ 08:33:30 UTC
|
|
Re: March/April 2007 Information on SuperMag, PM Rotary Devices, Energy "Good N (Score: 1)
by garymunson on Wednesday, May 02, 2007 @ 02:10:17 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | r.e. your question
"On the matter of potential or voltage, I'd hope every person, especially young people, interested in engineering physics, would ask this:"With a step-up Stanley-type transformer, notwithstanding that current is reduced and energy out equals energy in minus losses, why does an increased number of turns in the output coil result in increased voltage, and given that, where did the increased voltage come from?" "
Is this an joke question or are you not familiar with the theory behind transformer operation?
|
|
|
|
|
