Apr 20, 2009. The good thing about this is how easy it is to build, so instead of saying how you know it doesn't work cause some law u where taught in some old book. Test things for urself. Don't let ppl see how brainwashed you are, and how naive to belive things just cause you read them somewhere in school.

Hallo Peter I have seen your new design. This indeed would indeed work better maybe. And is more easy to make.

But on the other hand we are looking at 'just' a regular Variable- or Switched reluctance motor are we not? Nothing wrong with that of course, but as far as I see it the Bemf circuit is 'kind of' the only novel thing here. But these variable or switched reluctance drives are somewhat problematic to run and need smart driving circuits that can advance, elongate or retard the pulses on the fly based on system load and speed. Most of them also have a minute 'demagnetization' pulse to help speedup the collapse time of the coil/core section and so allow for higher rpm's. Since 'metal slowness' in flux change can be problematic. Regards, Steven Steven and Everybody, As is evident in the links you post, switched reluctance motors can be very powerful and very efficient in conventional terms. The purpose of my DVD is to provoke original thought in the mind of the viewer by showing that even a well understood phenomena like back EMF can be looked at in a fresh way.

I do not claim to have invented anything. What I am proposing is more of a new METHOD of operating these machines, then anything else.

Cara Download Video Avi Di Youtube Ssb4. The point is, when a coil of wire wrapped around an iron core is turned ON, it produces a magnetic field. That magnetic field can then be used to attract a piece of iron, producing mechanical energy.

Then the coil can be turned OFF, and the collapsing magnetic field will induce a new pulse of electricity that can be recaptured by the circuitry. In well designed systems, the magnetic field can continue to produce more mechanical energy even while it is decaying. The combined mechanical energy produced from both the applied electrical energy AND the recovered electrical energy both act in the forward direction. Because the electrical energy recovered by the circuit can continue to produce more mechanical energy, properly designed systems should be able to exceed the total mechanical outputs of other types of motors for their respective inputs. The electricity recovered can off-set the electricity applied to run the motor, but both can produce mechanical energy that is additive in the forward direction. That is the METHOD of operation I am suggesting. To the best of my knowledge, this is a new METHOD of running an electric motor.

The method can be applied to dozens of geometries. The switched reluctance motor designs shown on these links will not work well with this new method I am proposing because they all show a COMMON STATOR connection. The coils turn ON and OFF, but the magnetic field is always present in the stator core. The coils are just shifting the location of the POLES as they are presented to the rotor. The field never really turns OFF. This is partly why they need all the extra neutralizing coils and things.

Granted, the designs I am proposing are simplified, even stylized, to help you understand the CONCEPT of operation. There are definitely subtleties to the operations of these motors that I do not discuss. If you build something, you will start to see these things. But at least you will be at a point of doing something genuinely new and learning to optimize a promising design. John's methods of electrical energy recovery are ONE HALF of this method. They are a very important half, but they are only half.

The other half is the optimization of motor torque in the rotor-stator interaction. The amount of torque possible here is based on the magnetic field strength, the minimization of the air gap in the magnetic circuit, the geometry of the pole face interaction between the rotor and stator, and the timing.

The METHOD I am proposing brings these two halves together to produce a motor that takes best advantage of both. Currently, there are NO switched reluctance motors that I am aware of that run on these principles.

I hope this helps. Hello Peter it is true that you idea is not the same as the variable reluctance motors from the examples. And I for one do like the DVD, love to see someone try to help one other.

And the idea of back emf recovery is a very useful one. But like you said there are some details that can't be all explained in a 2.5 hour video. Driverhive 3.0 Crack Download. For example, the back emf can only be recovered up to the saturation point of the steel obviously.

But in my tests it was necessary to pulse the cores much longer in order to get some useful torque. The Teal patens show very super short pulses due to the commutator. But unless it was some mega capacitor blast I doubt that such a short pulse will be sufficient.

So in other words the required pulse in most cases needs to be longer than can be recovered afterwards. These things are vital to solve. And maybe switching to fast materials like Metglass will solve most of them, but it will be out of the budget of most home builders. Hi heres a neat little visual aid showing some existing motor design geomeitry. This could be useful if you want to learn whats existing and how they might be similar/different to the designs we are discussing. Maybe this will help you peter in answering peoples future questions on diferent motor types (like the switched reluctance motor) and where they fall short in design principle. I am curious as it does look remarkably similar (and powerful!!) to what we are after.

My minds eye can sort of see how if you fire 2 pole at the same time then both magnetic fields would create a cemf in each other. What if only 1 pole fired at a time in series around the loop. With the other coil circuts left open they would only see a voltage out (no closed circut with electrons creating an opposing mag field) so they would not oppose each other. Would this satisfy a c shape concept. Or are we losing the ability to create torque by doing this? Do we have an organized means for storing links we might want to refer back to? I can see how things might get messy here as the list gets longer making it dificult for a new comer to catch up to where we left off often times causing them to ask questions that have allready been answered.

It would be nice to archive some information in more oranized fashion like whats available in the yahoo groops files/photos/links section. If you fire 2 pole at the same time then both magnetic fields would create a cemf in each other. What if only 1 pole fired at a time in series around the loop. With the other coil circuts left open they would only see a voltage out (no closed circut with electrons creating an opposing mag field) so they would not oppose each other. Would this satisfy a c shape concept.

Or are we losing the ability to create torque by doing this? Cool flash tutorial on the motors. Wouldn't it make sense if 2 coils are opposing 180 that one is wound so north is facing the rotor and the oppositve has south facing the rotor so when they both pulse at the same time the magnetic fields aren't opposing? Hi all, I've posted an update on the design for the rotary attraction motor. It works better and is easier to make than the 'S' rotor. This design goes back to the ideas that worked very well in the Flux Motor.

I hope this helps more people start building units that work. Here is the link: Peter Hi Peter I for one am glad you produce what you produce. Thanks to John Bedini and others. Im not a gear head but i do think im a good judge of character and i think you and John are the real thing. From all that i have read on the web i have seen a continuity of thought on these radiant energy things. I see it as Tesla ( and others of his day, even a Brazilian Catholic Priest!) Schauberger,George CONSTANTINESCO.

EV Gray, Richard CLEM, Eugene FRENETTE, Karl SCHAEFFER, Stan Meyers, John Bediniand James L. They are all dealing with pulsation (electricity, water, air) at high pressure (voltage). They all seemed to have been working on some new way of tapping energy in a new way. This continuity of simular thinking but different materials is very interesting.

I for one am very excited to get your new DVD. I have read your book on 'Cold Electricity' a dozen times. (Sorry though i have watched your older tesla videos on google also very good!) My problem is i have reached the point that i would like to do some experimenting but since i have no background in electicity or motors, i dont know were to begin. Id like to join an experimentation group if they exist. Most 'normal' electricians and gear heads look at me like i have two heads when i speak about this stuff.

Any practicle suggestions? I live in Chicago area. PS patience is the mother of all virtue. To sykavy i say if you have no formal education in this field, your on the right track!! LOL Peters dvd was my first look inside understanding electric motors and i think im more open to being taught because someone else hasnt spoon fed me these 'basics' in school so i am not going to assume i allready 'know about this stuff' like so many others ive met have.

How to start? 2 things ive learned.

1 if you're genuinly interested and not just curious, and you have a desire or reason to learn. Than all you need are some good books to brush up on some basics (like i'm doing!) and dont be afraid to go fourth seek some open minded friends who can answer any questions you might have from reading those books!! 2 is ive learned that 'one mans garbage is anouther mans treasure' dont jump out and spend a bunch of money on new materials and fancy tools right away only to waste it if your not sure what your doing with it. First watch the dvd as many times as it takes untill you can start understanding the 'what and why' we are looking for in a single coil on an iron core with a rotor that completes the magnetic loop. Then try finding old 'free' appliances (like the junk microwave i took apart) and look for parts that might have laminated cores and maybe a coil even attached!! Study these parts in your hands and try to determine if you can hack, bend, warp, twist, turn, or modify in any other way the existing structure of the part to utilize the 'concepts' you learn from the dvd.

Might be good to make sure your modifications wont cost more than starting from scratch!! If you have friends or family who are machinists use them!!! I dont yet so im getting charged a minimum of $120 for my project from a local machine shop that has the required tools. Personaly i feel its more than worth it to fork out the money because thats the level of my determination.

You have to pick your level. Thank you for your compliments. Its nice to hear that what I am presenting is understandable.

The best place to start in this process is to build a Bedini SG motor exactly as the project is presented on the builder sites. Rick Friedrich's MONOPOLE 3 group on Yahoo is one of the best places to start. With this motor, you will be able to study the process of the electrical energy recovery in its purest form. Build a model of this and run it and study it and fine tune it until you can routinely recover over 90% of the electrical energy.

When you are familiar and comfortable with this part of the system, then build a SECOND model that has an optical or hall-effect commutator, and study it until you can recover 90% of the electrical energy. Both of the first two models will have magnets on the rotor. Then move on to the attraction motor principle with your THIRD model. This third model will only have an iron rotor, with no magnets. In this process, always build a completely new model for the next step and leave all of your earlier models in full running condition. Never take a working model apart to use its parts to build the next model. In order to learn properly, you must be able to go back, at a moment of insight, and look at the operation of the earlier models to see the subtle differences in behavior.

Best wishes, Peter. Cool flash tutorial on the motors. Wouldn't it make sense if 2 coils are opposing 180 that one is wound so north is facing the rotor and the oppositve has south facing the rotor so when they both pulse at the same time the magnetic fields aren't opposing?

Um when i said cemf wasnt thinking of the magnetic fields directly affecting each other, magneto motive force (mmf), as opposed emf. An mmf will enter the coil creating an electrical force (emf) i dont know if the polarity of the cemf is affected by the polarity of the mmf instead of whether mmf is building up or collapsing. I think i still dont know if this creates the opposing voltage polarity or the (north/south) poles of the incoming field creates the opposing voltage polarity. This is a very interesting point i would like to figure out!! Maybe i am wrong!! Maybe your idea of opposite poles would allow an additive voltage benefit to your outside input instead of an opposing voltage. In terms of magnetic attraction if i understand it right the iron rotor wont care what the poles are doing.

The rotors more interested closing the air gap for the given magnetude of flux passing through the loop. What do you think? Those sound like practicle ideas. Im a little afraid of working with a microwave circuit in any form. I think I'll try what Peter suggested.

The SG looks like something I might be able to handle. BTW I have found two designs for the SG motor. I thought at first that it was the original but then i noticed it said (simplified). Now i don't know much about this stuff but i think they took out the capacitors, which if i understood well, was very important to get the radiant energy working. Is this simplified one ok for me to use? Ps humility is truth.

Hahaha yes i wouldnt actually use the microwave tube in the oven or the HV winding in the transformer but the core in the transformer with out the existing coil might be useful. As for the monopole. Use the simplified circut in the monopole3 yahoo discusion group, as peter said for learning about the recovery circut. The cap setup is more advanced.

I built that one myself but i am backpeddling even further right now and reading about how a transistor works because yes i built the monopole but now i realize i still dont fully understand how the circut components interact with each other!! My neighbor found this link for me to study transistiors its pretty readable. And i am still trying to locate a copy of the book peter refers to in his dvd 'electricity basics' cheers!

Hahaha yes i wouldnt actually use the microwave tube in the oven or the HV winding in the transformer but the core in the transformer with out the existing coil might be useful. As for the monopole. Use the simplified circut in the monopole3 yahoo discusion group, as peter said for learning about the recovery circut. The cap setup is more advanced. I built that one myself but i am backpeddling even further right now and reading about how a transistor works because yes i built the monopole but now i realize i still dont fully understand how the circut components interact with each other!!

My neighbor found this link for me to study transistiors its pretty readable. And i am still trying to locate a copy of the book peter refers to in his dvd 'electricity basics' cheers! Eric Thanks Eric that site will help a lot. I hope im not too old to learn this stuff anyway it will make agreat hobby!

Do you have link to that discussion group of SG? Thanks agin for ya'lls kindness. Well I received the DVD on really good time, seeing it had to get to the UK.

So popped it in my laptop case and thought I would have a look at it in my Hotel Room one evening this week, as working away from home alot at the moment. But it will not play in my Laptop DVD, I think this is probably because it is not a pressed DVD but just a DVD-R. Will try it it my DVD Player when I get home, but what a bummer as actually found a free night to watch it and now even more intrigued to view it after reading this thread.

I am sure it will be worth the wait Regards Sean. Well I received the DVD on really good time, seeing it had to get to the UK. So popped it in my laptop case and thought I would have a look at it in my Hotel Room one evening this week, as working away from home alot at the moment. But it will not play in my Laptop DVD, I think this is probably because it is not a pressed DVD but just a DVD-R. Will try it it my DVD Player when I get home, but what a bummer as actually found a free night to watch it and now even more intrigued to view it after reading this thread. I am sure it will be worth the wait Regards Sean. I had simular problems when i recieved DVDs when i lived in Europe.

You'll in region 2 USA is in region 1. Microsft will usualy play a region 1 DVD 4x then never again.

Try it on a multy systems palyer. Hahaha yes i wouldnt actually use the microwave tube in the oven or the HV winding in the transformer but the core in the transformer with out the existing coil might be useful. As for the monopole.

Use the simplified circut in the monopole3 yahoo discusion group, as peter said for learning about the recovery circut. The cap setup is more advanced. I built that one myself but i am backpeddling even further right now and reading about how a transistor works because yes i built the monopole but now i realize i still dont fully understand how the circut components interact with each other!! My neighbor found this link for me to study transistiors its pretty readable. And i am still trying to locate a copy of the book peter refers to in his dvd 'electricity basics' cheers! Eric Eric, The book you are looking for is Basic Electricity. Amazon.com has 6 copies in hardbound and 54 new and used copies in paper back.

Here's the link: Good luck, Peter. Well I received the DVD on really good time, seeing it had to get to the UK.

So popped it in my laptop case and thought I would have a look at it in my Hotel Room one evening this week, as working away from home alot at the moment. But it will not play in my Laptop DVD, I think this is probably because it is not a pressed DVD but just a DVD-R. Will try it it my DVD Player when I get home, but what a bummer as actually found a free night to watch it and now even more intrigued to view it after reading this thread. I am sure it will be worth the wait Regards Sean. Sean, Sorry you couldn't watch my DVD in your laptop. The DVD is professionally duplicated, but it is in NTSC format, not PAL.

I hope you can find a player that plays both formats. It plays very well on computers here in the USA.

Once again, sorry for the problem. Peter I just saw your video it came in the mail yesterday. All i can say is you have a talent to teach.

I understood almost all of it. I do have a few questions that i had trouble with.

How does one handle the possible friction in the Teal piston. When it is in the relaxed mode and not being magnetized, what would keep it from scraping the sides? Would alluminum work to hold in the magnitism as well as iron? I was thinking that the extra weight could off-set the increase in power. Btw the tork of the teal example didn't seem strong.

It was a very interesting DVD and i think trade high schools should get a copy of it. There is definitely some more work to be done on the perfection of the electric motor.

Peter I just saw your video it came in the mail yesterday. All i can say is you have a talent to teach.

I understood almost all of it. I do have a few questions that i had trouble with. How does one handle the possible friction in the Teal piston.

When it is in the relaxed mode and not being magnetized, what would keep it from scraping the sides? Would alluminum work to hold in the magnitism as well as iron?

I was thinking that the extra weight could off-set the increase in power. Btw the tork of the teal example didn't seem strong. It was a very interesting DVD and i think trade high schools should get a copy of it. There is definitely some more work to be done on the perfection of the electric motor Sykavy, Thanks for the compliment. Yes, friction in the electric solenoid engine designs is a problem. Special structures must be put in place to minimize the friction.

This is why I have suggested going back to the rotary designs where friction can be minimized more easily. Aluminum does NOT contain the magnetic field like iron and cannot be substituted as the magnetic keeper in these motors. Yes, the torque in the piston engine design I showed was weak. I said as much in the film.

The reason it was weak was that the magnetic field still had over 1 inch of air gap at the end of the stroke. To get the mechanical power out of these motors, you must fold the magnetic field all the way down into the moving iron piece. Total air gap at the end of the power stroke should be no more than.010 inches. I showed that motor for two reasons. The first reason is that it did show the NO BACK EMF behavior in direct contrast to the induction motor. The second reason is that I could demonstrate that the more I folded the magnetic field down, the more mechanical energy it produced WITHOUT drawing more electricity.

Both of these are important PRINCIPLES for you to understand if you want to design a motor for yourself. Thanks for your questions, Peter.

Sykavy, Thanks for the compliment. Yes, friction in the electric solenoid engine designs is a problem. Special structures must be put in place to minimize the friction. This is why I have suggested going back to the rotary designs where friction can be minimized more easily. Aluminum does NOT contain the magnetic field like iron and cannot be substituted as the magnetic keeper in these motors. Yes, the torque in the piston engine design I showed was weak.

I said as much in the film. The reason it was weak was that the magnetic field still had over 1 inch of air gap at the end of the stroke. To get the mechanical power out of these motors, you must fold the magnetic field all the way down into the moving iron piece. Total air gap at the end of the power stroke should be no more than.010 inches. I showed that motor for two reasons. The first reason is that it did show the NO BACK EMF behavior in direct contrast to the induction motor. The second reason is that I could demonstrate that the more I folded the magnetic field down, the more mechanical energy it produced WITHOUT drawing more electricity.

Both of these are important PRINCIPLES for you to understand if you want to design a motor for yourself. Thanks for your questions, Peter The motor was great, I know it was just an illistration. Sorry if i sounded like i thought it was a proto-type. It is such a simple idea i don't know why more people haven't followed this way of thinking. I loved the point of separating the EMF and the mechanical.

Another question, would the iron start to become magnetized after awhile? The reason I ask is that id like to get some students involved. They will enter a solar energy race with manned boats. If i could get a motor to run on less energy and get back the emf and dump it into another motor instead of a battery it could be pretty impressive. The motor was great, I know it was just an illistration. Sorry if i sounded like i thought it was a proto-type.

It is such a simple idea i don't know why more people haven't followed this way of thinking. I loved the point of separating the EMF and the mechanical.

Another question, would the iron start to become magnetized after awhile? The reason I ask is that id like to get some students involved. They will enter a solar energy race with manned boats. If i could get a motor to run on less energy and get back the emf and dump it into another motor instead of a battery it could be pretty impressive. After looking at the other discussions here, i apologize for my silly questions.

Im still working on getting my SSG going and others here are way ahead in the experiments and training. Sykavy, No problem. Thanks for the apology. In this life, we ALL start at the beginning and learn at our own pace. Building your own machines and running your own experiments is very important if you are going to learn this material. Be patient with yourself.

Learning happens. It cannot be forced.

Your efforts are not less important because you are at a different position on the 'learning curve'. It is your commitment to learn it that raises your value in the conversation. Any of us are glad to share what we know, and are doubly glad when you are willing to take responsibility for coming up to speed by your own effort. Keep up the good work.

Another question, would the iron start to become magnetized after awhile? It depends on the kind of material you're using and the strength of the magnetic field you're applying to it. If you use the ordinary iron, sure it would soon got to be magnetized. If you use some soft steel (soft in the sense of it's magnetic hysteresis characteristic) it probably won't happen at least not if you don't apply to it some extremely strong magnetic field. Finally if you use some narrow hysteresis characteristic material if would never get to be magnetized. You can learn more about magnetic hysteresis here I apologize if I barged in this discussion but I'm just trying to help.

It depends on the kind of material you're using and the strength of the magnetic field you're applying to it. If you use the ordinary iron, sure it would soon got to be magnetized. If you use some soft steel (soft in the sense of it's magnetic hysteresis characteristic) it probably won't happen at least not if you don't apply to it some extremely strong magnetic field. Finally if you use some narrow hysteresis characteristic material if would never get to be magnetized. You can learn more about magnetic hysteresis here I apologize if I barged in this discussion but I'm just trying to help. Dont apologize i welcome your imput, especially in the Radiant Energy thread, which sounds like youve got it. (Vy mate velmy dobry English tesh.

) Thanks for the link! Im trying to learn. Hallo Peter, I have seen your video and find it a positive product and thank you for your input in this field. I know there are a lot more people to be thankful of like Bedini but this one is directed at you. Anyway I like the Teal concept only the whole mechanical wear and tear of the pistons kind of bothers me.

I mean a combustion motor can at least use oil to lubricate the pistons. Also I believe it will be quite noisy. But anyway I was kind of surprised when I saw in the video your ‘flux motor’ now the geometry was kind of familiar to me because I have tried in the past to build Ecklin-brown style variable reluctance generators. They were all made with great care. All made out of laminated material from microwave oven transformers. Machined to size, and each laminate reinsulated and reassembled. Only problem is that I never nearly managed to get the output levels described in this document.

But I did not know that you did something along these lines. Now I don’t know what your results were but mine were not really promising. The most I could get out of the best device is like 15 watt. But on the positive side, the thing is not really bothered by Lenz Law, since the coil and magnet are both stationary. And if you test the device and load the output coil the thing actually goes way up in rpm, which is of course the opposite if compared with normal generators which require more input torque once loaded.

But like I said my output was ‘nothing’ and had much magnetic cogging and was noisy and all. But on your old picture I see quite some light bulbs so I presume you were getting a good amount out. But back to the flux motor. I like this design. But you don’t tell much about it in the video. So what were the results?

You mentioned on the audio interview that you got speed problems which limited the design to like 500 rpm? Was this due to your switching system or due to the slowness of the steel? Since the steel needs a given time to fully build up and relax again. And although some people thing this is neglectable I must point out that this IS a problem and I have seen it in more devices. Anyway here are some pics of my machines.

(Note 00.jpg is not my system) Regards, Steven Dear Steven, Sorry I never replied to this post. With everything else happening at that time, it just slipped through the cracks. So anyway, here is my reply. The resemblance of the generators shown at the end of Electric Motor Secrets and the one's in your 'fluxgate generator' link are NOT a coincidence. Actually, I am the inventor! It's ancient history now, but here's what happened.

In 1980, John Ecklin began offering a $500 prize to anyone who could design a viable generator to circumvent Lenz law. His original Stationary Armature Generator patent was the beginning of this search. I was 28 and living in Hilo, Hawaii. I ran dozens of experiments and eventually designed a machine I called the 'Mechanical Rotary Transformer' in September of 1981.

I sent copies of the design to John Ecklin and Bruce DePalma and asked for their advice. DePalma showed my design at an alternative energy conference in Toronto, Canada in late October, 1981 and it was seen by Pete Charles, an electrical engineer in the Sacramento area. In a letter I received back from John Ecklin on November 21, 1981, John writes 'I don't know how to advise you on a patent. I use the patent disclosure document program.'

He also writes 'Your MRT-1 is a well engineered device.' All of my correspondence with John Ecklin is still in my files. I took John Ecklin's advice and filed a patent disclosure document on the design on December 1, 1981. My original copy was stamped Received in the Patent Office Mail Room on December 4, 1981, file #104580. In that document I state 'The device, called the Mechanical Rotary Transformer (MRT) consists, in its simplest configuration, of two 'magnetic distributors' and four transformer cores and coils firmly bolted together.'

Meantime, Pete Charles was back home building the first unit. He had it running by January 1982. He got my phone number from Bruce DePalma and called me. Unfortunately, a guest in the house picked up the phone and didn't write down the message, so I didn't know that Pete had called. When I didn't call Pete Charles back, he just figured I wasn't interested. In March, a young engineer showed up at Pete's place interested in testing the generator. That person was Paul Brown.

The infamous 'Paul Brown Report' issued on June 15, 1982. In the credits at the end, he states 'We would like to express our thanks to Moss Research who made this project possible.'

Moss was Pete Charles' wife's maiden name and an alias he used once in a while. I was first alerted to the existence of the 'Paul Brown Report' when I received a letter from John Ecklin dated September 12, 1982. In it he writes: 'Dear Peter, Have you seen the Paul Brown Report for Moss Research? It sure looks like your Rotary transformer.'

The damage was done. In the days before the internet, nobody cared that I had documents stamped in the patent office 7 months before the 'Paul Brown Report' issued. By that time, Paul was famous and I was just a 'nobody'. To this day, 26 years later, most people still have no idea who designed this machine.

Mostly it has been called 'Paul Brown's Magnetic Distributor Generator'. Your re-edited copy of the 'Paul Brown Report' document calls it the Brown Ecklin Fluxgate Generator, but your document has taken Paul Brown's name off the back of the report above the date. The historic truth is, I worked out the design for this machine in the summer of 1981 in Hilo, Hawaii. Pete Charles built the first working model in Sacramento, California in January of 1982. Paul Brown published the first written report on a preliminary set of tests results in June of 1982, which included a number of exaggerations.

The machine is NOT capable of 300% operation. 120% efficiency is about tops! And yes, these machines make lots of obnoxious noise! The unit I show in the DVD was built by Michael Knox and is capable of about 700 watts output.

The picture shows a low power test, as you may notice, the light bulbs were not to full brightness. I moved to Santa Barbara in 1982 and with Michael Knox continued to work with these designs for both generators and motors. Of all the variations on the four coil/core configuration, the Flux Motor was the most important innovation. Again, totally my design, built by Michael Knox. At some point, I may scan all of these documents from my files and put up a page on my website. Until then, that is the history of the 'Paul Brown Report' and the 'Magnetic Distributor Generator'.

If you have any questions about these machines, I'd be happy to discuss them in a different forum. Lindemann, Your discussion of your 'Magnetic Distributor Generator' triggered a question: how is it that the attraction motor circumvents Lenz's law?

As the piece of iron is attracted towards the electromagnet coil, magnetic fields will be induced into the iron that interact with those produced by the electromagnet. By Lenz's law, won't opposing currents then be induced back into the electromagnet coil? I have watched your 'Electric Motor Secrets' DVD video now twice and find it fascinating. However, I am learning so I may have missed the answer to my question even with two DVD views. I have just ordered 'Secrets of Cold Electricity' DVD and look forward to its arrival. Sincerely, Drexel.

Lindemann, Your discussion of your 'Magnetic Distributor Generator' triggered a question: how is it that the attraction motor circumvents Lenz's law? As the piece of iron is attracted towards the electromagnet coil, magnetic fields will be induced into the iron that interact with those produced by the electromagnet. By Lenz's law, won't opposing currents then be induced back into the electromagnet coil? I have watched your 'Electric Motor Secrets' DVD video now twice and find it fascinating. However, I am learning so I may have missed the answer to my question even with two DVD views. I have just ordered 'Secrets of Cold Electricity' DVD and look forward to its arrival. Sincerely, Drexel Drexel, Thanks for asking this question.

I'm sure others have been a little confused by this as well. The question is, does the attraction of the iron rotor piece produce any Lenz's Law effects in the stator coils? The answer is YES, it does. The next questions is, how much?

The answer to this is, less than 1% as much as if the iron rotor had a coil on it and was allowed to produce electricity as it was attracted into alignment. The absence of any electricity producing coil on the iron rotor is the important difference. The magnetic field induced in the iron rotor is totally passive and is responding exclusively to the magnetic field produced by the stator coil windings. Therefore, it has no power to cause a reverse influence. So, there is nothing in the rotor/stator relationship to cause a reverse induction in the stator coils.

The reluctance of the magnetic path is changing as the iron rotor comes into alignment, so there are changes in the inductance of the circuit, but this is not the same as a Lenz's Law reverse induction. I hope this helps you understand the difference. Lindemann, Thank you for the clear explanation, now the 'missing' Lenz effects make sense.

To approach this problem from an energy viewpoint, the iron rotor piece requires no energy from the coil via transformer action so no energy is needed from the coil, except for the small losses induced in the iron rotor caused by eddy currents. It also appears that the eddy losses in iron may be the small Lenz effect you discussed - is this correct? Taking this a step further, what if the passive iron rotor piece was replaced by a permanent magnet? This change now seems to make things much more complicated. With the right polarities the approaching attraction part should be enhanced, but now the leaving magnetic fields are going to want to induce currents into the coil to oppose the motor action. If the coil circuit is opened at that point then very high voltages should result. Does this make sense?

Thank you for your patience with beginners. Sincerely, Drexel.

Simple to build Magnet Charger.Two batteries in series May work evan better.Be careful if trying.I have only tried one 12V car battery so far & it used 25 Amps.Did the job OK on that.A welding machine can also be used.This was used on a Lucas ML CK1 1923 Magneto.It has two magnets in it & lost 50% of its power after I stripped it down to repair.Next video it gets a hand spun test.This is a ML CK1 rotating clockwise looking at it from the pionts end or anticlock wise from the drive end.Also I put the Stator in a spot like in the mud drawing as I think that may perhaps helps.