|The Tom Bearden
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 4:19 PM
Subject: Simple Production of A Self-Powering Permanent Magnet Motor
In electrical systems, the term “back emf” actually refers to the equal and opposite force field accompanying the “forward emf”, in any “symmetrical” electrical system.
In magnetic systems, the corresponding term is “forward and back mmf”, rather than “forward and back emf”.
With the symmetrization of the EE model by Lorentz in 1892, just at the very beginning of electrical engineering, our electrical engineers have been trained to think, design, build, and deploy only symmetrical systems. Lorentz (at the bidding of J. P. Morgan) eliminated all remaining asymmetrical Maxwellian systems in the already sharply curtailed Heaviside equations, further limiting the already severely-limited Heaviside model and thus the electromagnetic science and technology that later grew up to be based on it.
With the symmetrization of the Heaviside equations, those arbitrarily symmetrical equations became the present “electrical engineering” model, usually taught (falsely) as if they were Maxwell’s original theory. Maxwell’s theory contains 20 quaternion-like equations in 20 unknowns, and contains both symmetrical and asymmetrical systems. You can develop and build all sorts of asymmetrical systems with Maxwell’s original theory, that cannot be built in accord with the symmetrized Heaviside theory now loosely referred to as “Maxwell’s theory”.
All rotating motors actually turn themselves from the broken symmetry that is created inside them. The present engineers have been trained that they must pay to put extra energy into the system, just to break its symmetry. That of course is totally false. Otherwise, a rotating electron (with its continual spin) would not spin.
To reiterate: In order to achieve self-rotation of a magnetic motor, one must produce broken symmetry (asymmetry) in that otherwise symmetrical system.
When we use laterally-symmetric bar magnets, which presently is essentially all that the industry makes, the field strength on the left side of each magnet is equal to its field strength on its right side.
So when I have a stator N and a rotor S facing it, using such “laterally symmetrical forces”, then in the forward mmf region (where the rotor S is approaching the stator N) the rotor pole is being accelerated by the attractive force from the stator rotor pole in the forward mmf region, and so is having free angular momentum being generated and stored in excess in the flywheel and shaft. That's real energy (specifically, energy x time).
But when the rotor magnetic pole passes the stator magnetic pole, the direction of the mutual attraction force is now reversed (this is the back mmf region), and so the rotor is decelerating and thereby decelerating the previously accelerated shaft and flywheel. If the magnetic fields of each magnet are laterally symmetric, and nothing else is done, then in the back mmf region the system will freely take back (decelerate) all the excess energy freely stored in the accelerated flywheel and shaft in the previous forward mmf region.
So the net force of this symmetrical arrangement is zero, and the net angular momentum generated and stored in the flywheel and shaft is also zero. In its back mmf (decelerating) region, the symmetrical permanent magnet motor system takes back all the free energy it stored in its earlier forward mmf (accelerating) region.
So that silly thing will not give us any self-rotation and free energy, because of that lateral field strength symmetry of the bar magnets used as stator and rotor magnets.
In a normal motor, we are trained to put in a coil (say, there in the back mmf region) and then we pay to put in a sudden surge of EM energy to that coil, so that it momentarily overrides (cancels) the back mmf force. In short, we momentarily make the system asymmetrical, so that its net back mmf is less than its forward mmf. That means that now the motor retains at least some of its excess acceleration and excess angular momentum added to the flywheel and shaft in its previous acceleration (forward mmf) zone, but we are “paying” to have this occur. Anyway, once that broken symmetry between forward and back mmfs is there, with the back mmf deliberately reduced to less than the forward mmf, the motor will self-rotate because of its own system asymmetry.
And so we can add a “drag load” to the shaft, to soak up all that excess energy gained in each rotation, to do work to power the load. In that case,
the motor rotates continuously, furnishing energy and power to power the load continuously. But it does not do it “for free”, because we are paying for that broken symmetry all the time.
We are paying to break the symmetry, nothing else.
Now let us reason together. Nature and this system do not care how we get that broken symmetry. If we wish to continually "pay" for it, and thus be tied to consuming fuel to get our "payment" energy for breaking the symmetry, we can do so.
And that is precisely what everybody is and has been trained to do – ever since J. P. Morgan had Lorentz symmetrize the EE model itself, so our engineers would build only symmetrical systems. In that case, they will always have to pay to make the required broken symmetry, and that keeps the world firmly tied to its energy crisis and its escalating economical problems.
But now suppose we contract with some nanocrystalline folks, to build a special "laterally asymmetrical" permanent magnet. They will lay down the plane of crystals for the side edge, with full magnetic field at the beginning layer (say, on the left), then lay an adjacent plane to the right but with a slightly weaker magnetic field, and they continue laying layers to the right with successively weaker fields.
The result is a permanent magnet (bar magnet) with asymmetric field strengths laterally.
Suppose we get two of those laterally asymmetric bar magnets, and use them with a rotor and stator and shaft to make a self-rotating motor.
Suppose we mount the rotor (say, S-pole facing the stator) and stator
(say, N-pole facing the rotor) so that, when the rotor S pole is rotating
and approaching the stator N pole, the strong sides of both bar magnets
are facing each other. This gives a certain acceleration added to the
flywheel and shaft, and it stores up a certain amount of free angular
momentum in the rotor and flywheel, while the rotor is traversing through
that “forward mmf” zone .
Then as the rotor magnetic S pole passes the stator magnetic N pole and enters the back mmf zone of the system, the weaker sides of the magnets are now facing. So the deceleration in this back mmf zone is less than the incoming acceleration was (in the forward mmf zone).
And that silly thing will sit there and self-rotate, till the end of time if nothing else bothers it or affects it, and so long as nothing breaks. And it will try to continually accelerate the flywheel and shaft with a net acceleration during each rotation.
This means I can now add a matched “drag (decelerating)” load to the accelerated shaft, and use all that extra stored energy from each rotational cycle, to freely power my load.
And if I match the load drag and the available “free asymmetry energy” net acceleration, that silly beast will sit there and self-rotate and power its load till the end of time, if nothing else intervenes.
And now we do not have to pay anything for breaking the symmetry, after the initial costs of the laterally asymmetric magnets and assembling the system are paid!
Magnetic motors are powered by their broken symmetry, not by what breaks the original symmetry. We ourselves can continually pay to continually break the symmetry if we wish, or we can just build the system asymmetrically in the first place. Nature doesn’t care.
Note that, once the nanocrystalline folks have done their number to develop the laterally-asymmetry bar magnets, then such permanent magnets with laterally asymmetric field strengths can be put into production for not too much more than the cost of normal symmetric magnets.
And at that point, anyone in the world can order some laterally-asymmetric permanent magnets, and easily assemble his own self-rotating motor and thus his own self-powering system.
Hope this helps! This is precisely what I was speaking about in the “solutions” paper. Will be drawing it out in drawings soon, to show exactly how it works. Heck, you can even have someone put it on a simulator, and the simulator will show you that it will self-rotate and self-power its load.