2008年9月5日 星期五
Why Euler's Coil must have 4 coils as minimum?
2008年8月20日 星期三
Yet another idea on Euler's Coil
2008年8月14日 星期四
2008年7月7日 星期一
致曾蔭權的公開信
行政長官曾蔭權先生你好,
本人得聞曾蔭權先生最近因副部長制一事成了反對派及傳媒的攻擊對象,因為自香港政府成立十年來,貧富不均問題在香港的經濟結構下一直未有改善,而前 任董建華亦留了一幅難攤子給你,在此等經濟環境下,他們如果不借你來消消氣,就不當你是特首了。本來香港是自由經濟,香港政府再強亦不可以指揮經濟,不可 以把責任全推到你身上,可惜你一而再,再而三提出了具爭議性的政策,而九月立法會選舉臨近,如果不攻擊你就拿不到選票了。
我有一個相當大膽的建議,希望可以幫到你,因為你剛提出拿一百億去為四川賑災,本意及出發點都是非常好,只是提出的時機不對,如果你在五一二地震發生後第 二天立刻提出此想法,則大有可能被立法會即時通過,並在中國內外受一致讚賞,如今事過境遷,香港人正為通脹而煩惱,經濟又未見有起色,而且還是在副部長制 的陰雲未消下提出,要成功當然是有難度了。但是,我不以為立法會一定會否決此次撥款,問題是你要有辦法令議員不可以拿損給四川的一百億和其他的項目如增加 長者生活浦貼、減稅、增加綜援等相提並論,前者不是投資亦無法保證物盡其用,後者卻可以被視為投資在市民身上,不過現在百物騰貴,成效頗成疑問。
我以為政府可以嘗試從問題的根本着手,通脹的主要成因是油價居高不下,而香港的工商業十分倚重不可再生的化石燃料。所以政府必須試圖減低香港對化石燃料的 依賴,我以為目前的另類能源如風能、太陽能及節能措施都是杯水車薪,除非政府可以撥款一億資助新能源的開發。雖然看來是冒險一點,但以你和中共國政府今年 屢遭天災人禍的勢頭,你大有可能成為董建華第二,因此兵行險着是其時。
我所指的新能源,是指非主流科學研究者提出的新能源(Overunity),它們可以大大減低生產能量的成本,而中共國亦打算在2009年使用同屬Overunity類的匈牙利開發的EMB技術,而台灣的民進黨本來亦打算在2000年購入,這是世界大勢,亦可能是你任內最大的成就!如果你真的打算非捐不可,不妨考慮買豬肉搭豬骨的策略,趕在議員之前,自己提出一藍子的撥款建議,迫議員去承受過量撥款的政治後果。
我同時亦寄了信給中國總理溫家寶及台灣馬英九總統,請你慎重考慮!
此致
一班關心世界能源危機的香港發明家
2008年7月5日 星期六
Positive Drag Generator design
(Euler’s suggestion of Generator design which produce more output than input, because magnetic energy as a by-product of the generating process of the electromagnetic(generating) coil is used to compensate the repelling forces between electromagnetic coil and Magnet. It is said that compensating effect could be bigger than repelling force so the Generator is self-accelerating.
Reprinted with permission of Euler.)
(There is an error in the calculation from Euler, the ideal acceleration ratio =((1+1)²+(1+1)²)²*2-4=124
The effective acceleration ratio is ((1+1)²+(1+1)²)²*60%*2-4*1.2=72,
That is the output would be 72 times of the input.)
2008年7月3日 星期四
My thoughts on a thought experiment
The thought experiment I am referring is proposed by euler in here. It challenge the very idea of energy conservation in the process of electrical generation. Since we often think of generation of electricity using induced magnetic flux change in electromagnetic coil is a conversion process, which kinetic energy of the process of creating the magnetic flux change is converted into electrical energy. That experiment intended to prove otherwise.
My thought here is on how to improve that experiment with respect to the technicalities of that experiment. One technicality is the timing for turning on and off the electromagnetic coils: In case which the extra kinetic energy from the repulsion between the coil and swinging magnet would merely slow down the approach of the swinging magnet; in other case which that kinetic energy is helping to push swinging magnet downward. My suggestion is to use multiple independent electromagnetic coils arranged in a n*n square with only one end to face the poles approaching swinging magnet. This is applying Euler’s Coil’s principle to increase the strength of repulsion force, thus the kinetic energy given by the electrical generation process. Theoretically, that would decrease the time needed for the electromagnetic coil to be switched on.
My another design suggestion is instead of placing one electromagnetic coil at the highest point which the swinging magnet reach, we can place many electromagnetic coil along the rim of the circle(i.e. the trajectory of the swinging magnet). Only when the swinging magnet reach certain height then we activate those electromagnetic coils, what we intended to achieve here is the vector sum of all repelling forces from the electromagnetic coil has the effect of pushing the magnet upward in its original direction of motion. Then the electromagnetic coils are immediately shut off. Now, if the timing is excellent, we should have the swinging magnet has more kinetic energy after electrical energy is generated. That would pose more difficulties to the view that electrical generation is an energy conversion process, and allow us more choice to interact with the movement of the swinging magnet along its pathway.
My last design suggestion is to connect the electromagnetic coils in the left and right using even/odd number of independent electromagnetic coil. The purpose is to create a pull effect on one side of the swinging magnet and a push effect on the other side of the swinging magnet, thus increase the reactionary kinetic energy of the swinging magnet when it is nearest to the electromagnetic coil. Thus, in theory, the swinging magnet would swing indefinitely.
In either cases of my improvement, the law of conservation of energy in electrical generation is violated if we accept the notion that generation of electricity is an energy conversion process.
It doesn’t matter the technicalities of each suggestions as long as there exists cases against this law.
2008年7月1日 星期二
My very strange invention
The name of the game is to prevent electrical charge from going back to the other end of the battery so electrical energy would not dissipated as a result, which is base on my understanding that battery is a medium of electrical energy but not the source of electrical energy itself. This is my idea on how to do it.
A Question on the difference of Electrical and Magnetic field
Question of today on nature of Magnetism
My idea of Assisted Inductance Technology
My thought today is if we can applied Euler's Coil Technology into the assisting(non-central) electromagnetic coils for increase the effect of electromagnetic induction in this design?
A mechanism for Charge multiplier?
(This is an idea from Euler, reprinted with permission, my thought to why couldn’t we arranged the metal plate in a circle so the electrostatic field reinforce each other? Also another technicalities which Euler has ignored is the mechanism to keep other plates electrically neutral, and does that mechanism require energy to maintain its operation? It especially looks like an development from MCSSF.
The original illustration is here, here and here.)
Background/Development of Idea:
Consider a simple capacitor, when we charged it to +Q then the capacitor is carrying Q charges. Now suppose we can ‘fuse’ another identical uncharged capacitor to this charged capacitor, what will happen?
What will happen is instead of +Q charges, the charges would raised to +2Q. Now assume we can repeat this process for N times so then we have +NQ charges. We could then discharge and feedback this amount of charges into the first capacitor. Then the process restart again from +NQ until N2 Q . We can repeat this process as much as we want until the capacitor reach it’s maximum charging capacity. And the amount of electrical charge, thereby the content of electrical energy has been amplified without costing the user any extra energy.
Summary & Discussion:
The process of amplification of electrical energy is as followings: First electricity from a source is feed into the first compartment of a device which used to held charges, then the controlling mechanism deactivate the field blocking mechanism between first and second compartment. The second compartment is made of material sensitive to electrical field which respond by forming a comparable electrical field. Alternatively, we can have two independent devices for holding the charges(without the need for inputing extra energy to maintain the charge of either one) as the first and second compartment, which in this case the second independent device is move closer to the first. But the charges in both compartment of device are not allow to move across the boundary of device/compartment. In either case, the purpose is for the second device/compartment to respond to the presence of electrical field by forming an electrical field either the same or higher strength using simple electrostatic induction principle. This process is repeated until we get a desirable One Time amplification ratio(o). At the end of the first turn, all charge are discharged using a discharging mechanism or device. Now since each charges carrying the identical amount of electrical energy content, this process is thus increase the overall electrical energy content. And if we are still not satisfy with the amplification of electrical charge/energy for this time, we can feedback the new amount of electrical charge/energy as the source and repeat this process recursively until the final amplification ratio (f) is satisfactory to us.
Claim:The system in its entirety with at least all its essential components each for the purpose stated above and together as a whole for the purpose of magnification of electrical energy through simple electrostatic induction take place in recursive manner.
Related Claims:
EMEAT(Euler)
Applications:
Electrical Energy Amplification System as a critical component in powering every Self-Sustainable process
Advantages:
-
Simple to construct.
-
Effective in its purpose.
-
Energy saving.
Technicalities:
-
The efficiency of field separation mechanism.
-
The timing of control mechanism.
-
The control of feedback process.
Curious thoughts on Parallel Path Technology
1. Could we use Parallel Path Technology to enhanced a Permanent Magnet? To strengthen its magnetic field?
2. What would happen if we use Parallel Path Technology to enhanced an electromagnetic coil? Do we get extra magnetic energy from the electromagnetic coil? Or getting extra electrical energy from the electromagnetic coil?
2008年6月30日 星期一
An invention using Euler's Coil Technology
A Motor-Generator design using the idea of Euler’s Coil Technology.
The solution to the inductance issue in Overunity Motor design
The answer of this design problems lies in a phenomena known as ‘Parametric Power Conversion’ which a coreless electromagnetic coil would attract an iron core into itself, lead to an instantaneous increase of electrical energy in the electromagnetic coil. Therefore what we need to do in the design of overunity motor is by placing corelss electromagnetic coil as the stator, and a ring consists with material that is ferromagnetic alternating with material that is non-magnetic as the rotor. Then we need a circuit breaker to demagnetize the electromagnetic coils to prevent them from holding the rotor ring. If we can overcome the technicality of letting the ring to enter and depart from the electromagnetic coils freely, while find a way to transfer that angular momentum to do useful work in outside; then the motor require little or no electrical energy to operate(because the lost in electrical resistance in the electromagnetic coil would be compensated by Parametric Power Conversion). We got kinetic energy from electromagnetic coils for free. We essential continually borrow the kinetic energy from the bonding which held the stator static.
How to overcome the technicalities of letting the ring to enter and depart from the electromagnetic coils freely, while find a way to transfer that angular momentum to do useful work in outside. We essentially need the rotor to float in the middle air, while extract kinetic energy from it. How is it possible?
There are two approaches to this technicality: 1. We can think in the direction of using special physical mechanism to hold the ring in mid-air and use friction to transfer its kinetic energy like bearings; 2. We can separate the mechanism which hold the ring in the mid-air and the mechanism to take the kinetic energy out of the ring. One mechanism for latter that naturally come to mind is attraction and repulsion of magnetic/electrical field. For instance, we can use the magnetized metal in the ring moving between the electromagnetic coils to attract the ferromagnetic metal of the shell which is supported by a central axis. However, caution need to taken to avoid the mechanism to harvest kinetic energy of the rotor from diluting the effect of electromagnetic coil on the ring.
2008年6月28日 星期六
Further Development of Euler's Coil
Euler's Coil Technology is essentially the ways which electromagnetic coil arranged could affect its mutual inductance of the system as all. We can manipulate that to cause an imbalance of inductance in the magnetization of those electromagnetic coils, and the Back EMF caused by inductance in the demagnetization of those electromagnetic coils, so to harvest extra electrical/magnetic energy from the system. What I originally thought of is not using electromagnetic coil but the question: We all know that a magnetic field is weaken by distances, what if we feedback the magnet field from a field-emitting object back to itself? Does that achieve an strengthening effect on original field-emitting object itself?
Only now does I know that it is already been discovered in electromagnetism as the ‘Close-Loop’ Effect’, the magnetic field is stronger when placed near an object that would produce an induction effect. In a sense, the presence of field-responding object has create self-reinforcing circle of reinforcement of these magnetic fields.
Now what if we added the effect of Parallel Path Technology into that? i.e. If we have more than one close-loop that feedback to its original magnetic field-emitting object, wouldn't be able to strengthening the magnetic field further? Moreover, if Euler's Coil is arranged in such a way that some receiving coils are under the influence of more than one electromagnetic coils (i.e. For instance, in this arrangement). It is possible that the source electromagnetic coil would interacting with more than one electromagnetic coil, so it get more than one source of feedback. Suppose we arranged all of them that would mutually reinforce the effect of varying the polarity of one end of electromagnetic coil, would that theoretically further increase the effect of Euler's Coil, thus we could increase the extra electrical energy harvest from this invention?
Euler's invention: MCSSF
(With permission from Euler, I suspect that is not really an invention at all, it is just a principle that we can apply on Magnetic field emitting object. If we arrange them right then we got the strengthening effect, if we arrange them wrong then we got a weakening effect. This is Euler/Tesla's Coil applied on magnetic field.)
2008年6月25日 星期三
From euler: The Principle of Non-Dragging Generator
(With the permission of eulertruthbible, original: http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/the-principle-of-non-dragging-generator/)
Non-Dragging Generator, NDG is the conceptual framework which many overunity generator designs we are working at for a long time. The attachment is the principle of its design and operation.
The claim of patent has already written, our team is the first team on Earth to make such a claim:
ndgconceptclaim
From euler: Summary of Euler's Coil Technology
(Looks like Tesla Coil to me, it appears to me that many innovation now are only a renovation of past innovation from genius like Nicola Tesla. How backward is humanity still struggling with technology 50 years ago! This topic is worth exploring. It is also interesting that the implementations and experiments don't correspond closely with the theory. I will write a better one later.)
Theory: http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/the-idea-of-eulers-coil-technology/
Consider n electromagnetic coils arranged in a circle with end to end. One electromagnetic coil is connected with A.C, and all other electromagnetic coils are switched on(i.e. Maximum electrical current). The is the source electromagnetic coil, and other are receiving electromagnetic coils. How is the mutual inductance of the system as a whole varies as n changes?
In the case of n=2, one can imagine that when one end of the source electromagnetic coil is induced to polarize in the direction of N, and the other end of the source electromagnetic coil is induced to polarize in the direction of S. Now it is obviously the one end of other electromagnetic coil would be induced to polarize in the direction of N and the other end would polarize in the direction of S. Thus, in a sense, the receiving electromagnetic coil added to the ‘ease’ of the source electromagnetic coil. We thus expect the mutual inductance of the system as a whole to be lower than individual electromagnetic coil.
In the case of n=3. For the sake of description, we assume that source electromagnetic coil is in the middle. Suppose the left end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the right end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. From the perspective of the induction from the source electromagnetic coil, the right end of the left electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the left end of the right electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. Due to the virtue of construction of electromagnetic coil, the two end of the same electromagnetic coil must be of opposite magnetic polarity. Therefore we suppose the left end of the left electromagnetic coil should polarize in the direction of N, and the right end of the right electromagnetic coil should polarize in the direction of S. However, since these two end are next to each other, from the perspective of mutual induction between the left electromagnetic coil and the right electromagnetic coil MUST be of the same magnetic polarity. Therefore we arrive in a contradiction between two induction tendency, which cancel each other out. Thus, we expect an mutual inductance of the whole system to be infinite, therefore it is impossible to magnetize the source electromagnetic coil. (The whole situation change, however, when we place an ferromagnetic metal bar to connect the left end of the left electromagnetic coil and the right end of the right electromagnetic coil.)
In the case of n=4. For the sake of description, we assume that source electromagnetic coil is in the leftmost. Suppose the left end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the right end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. From the perspective of the induction from the source electromagnetic coil, the left end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N, and the right end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S. The left end of the 2nd electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the right end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. For the 3rd electromagnetic coil, the left end polarize in the direction of N, and the right end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S. Notice that is of the same magnetic polarity as the left end of the source electromagnetic coil. Thus the mutual induction effect from the source electromagnetic coil produce the same direction of change in magnetic polarity as from the interaction from the pairs of receiving electromagnetic coils nearest to each other. The net effect is the mutual inductions of individual pairs of receiving electromagnetic coils added to each other. Thus we expect the mutual inductance of the system as a whole must be lower than we place all electromagnetic coils parallel to each other(as in a transformer.)
We can generalize the result to all cases which n is even. The mutual inductances of the system as a whole drop below the average. However when n is odd, the mutual inductances of the system as a whole goes up throw the roof. The gist of all of them: The configuration and arrangement of electromagnetic coils would alter the mutual inductance of the system as a whole that is not linearly related to the electromagnetic coil's natural inductances.
Could we get extra electrical energy by the virtue of how we arranged the electromagnetic coils? Is there exists particular configurations of electromagnetic coil that would increase and decrease the mutual inductance of the system as a whole? Could we use this method to maximize the chance of two electromagnetic coils resonance with each other? Could we use this method to alter the pattern of variation of the mutual inductance of the system as a whole to produce extra electromagnetic energy?
Yes, Euler think so. This would be a solution to the energy crisis. Science just doesn’t explore these instance of electromagnetic system because that may require a major modification of the laws in classic electromagnetic.
2008年6月19日 星期四
From differential to hypothesis on Gravity and Electromagnetism
Now if we apply the same line of thinking in gravity and electromagnetism, we notice that they are both decreased with the square of distance. And the reciprocal of them follow the same patterns as the 2-th power of consecutive length. Thus, in a sense, the external irregularity of their reciprocal of strength of them are themselves a manifestation of hidden regularity. Moreover, if we use the term differential space for the differential of any functions, then we notice that the differential space of the reciprocal of strength of them is linear and directly proportional to distance. Therefore, in the differential space of the reciprocal gravity and electromagnetism, they are directly related to the distance from the sources. This relationship is only distorted because the gravity and electromagnetism only lives in space of space, it has only effect on motion of motion but not motion itself. In a sense it is like force that it has only Secondary Effect on motion. I could hypothesis it is only because Space has differentiated to Secondary Space so gravity and electromagnetism has an effect.
Notice we have been talking about is the reciprocal of strength of Gravity and Electromagnetism, i.e. The lack of Gravity and Electromagnetism strength is somehow a linear phenomena directly proportional to distance. That must related to the nature of space-time itself. It is like space-time provide a mechanism to prevent the spread of Gravity and Electromagnetism field that is linear in its nature.
Assumed that Gravity and Electromagnetism strength is indeed a consequence of Differential Space, then what happen if we reverse the process of differentiation to reveal its Primary? By integrating the Gravity and Electromagnetism strength twice, we arrived at the natural logarithm. Thus we could said the irregularity of variation of strength of Gravity and Electromagnetism is a resulted from the differential Space of originally regular. So why is Gravity and Electromagnetism field strength is originally logarithmic?