My thought on the problem of Infinite Inductance

In my last article discussing inductance in coils, I have mentioned that classic electromagnetism face the theoretical problem of infinite inductance. Namely, to magnetize the electromagnetic coil, the supply of electrical current has to provide infinite energy to overcome the infinite inductance in theory. What I have ignore at that time is the infinite inductance issue also appear in the demagnetization of coil. In a sense, the electrical supply has to provide infinite energy to magnetize the coil, only to be returned at the stage of demagnetization of coil. How is it possible to borrow infinite energy from the electrical supply at the beginning then to be returned at the demagnetization stage? And through what mechanism make that possible?

Now, I attempt to provide a solution to this issue of infinite inductance. To resolve this problem, we need to assume that both the magnetization and demagnetization for the coil is a gradual process rather than an instantaneous process. At the stage of initialize magnetization, it is assumed that there is random electrical current flowing in the coil or at least Voltage exist in the same direction of the intended direction of electrical current. Thus the process is far from a non-magnetize coil being magnetize, it is the external electrical current has gradually excited the pre-existing electrical potential of the coil in the same direction, until which an electrical current is formed in the coil in the intended direction of the electrical current. Thus we expected the electrical voltage in the coil is oscillate between two directions in the coil, a definite amount of electrical energy is taken from the supply then immediately returned to the supply in a fashion similar to reversed damped S.H.M. In a sense, the electrical supply is not flooding the coil with electrical energy, rather it is gradually resonance-in the electrical energy in the form of electrical current. It take time for the supply to reach the same oscillation frequency as the coil.
Similarly, when the coil begin to demagnetize, it is not immediately demagnetize, rather the pre-existing electrical potentiality in the opposition direction are gradually built up. Then the coil begin to resonance-out electrical energy to the supply in a damped S.H.M-like fashion. It take time for the coil and the supply to reach the same oscillation frequency so electrical energy to be returned.

Although this model could adequately resolve the theoretical difficulties in classic electromagnetism, it also bring in some ghosts in the process. One the biggest problem is that could we treat an electrically neutral coil is identical to a coil with equal and opposite electrical currents? Thus, in a sense, the electrical supply only accentuate the existing tendencies(potentailities) in the coil. What if we extend this idea to all electrical circuit which a 4A electrical current flowing in one direction is equivalent to a 6A electrical current flowing in one direction and 2A electrical current flowing in the opposite direction, or it equal to any combination of electrical currents in the opposite direction differ by 4A? What make the difference between them? Could we also take a probabilistic view of electrical current which electrical supply only increase the probability of electrical current in the intended direction? What of the quantization of electrical current take place in each metallic atom? What does it have to do with Quantum mechanic?

Inspiration for Jul 11, 2005

Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 11:21 PM

Thought this is important, therefore I tell you: I remember once I read a book about complexity, it has theory that certain class of organism is evolving while some is devolving by the virtue of their level of complexity. It even calculate the critical value for this to happen. Their is no magic behind this except pure Mathematical and naturalistic reason. I wonder if this concept could applied to explain alignment of Magnetic field of individual atoms.

Another explanation for Lawrence’s invention

Mon, Apr 4, 2005 at 3:04 AM

This is my second attempt to theorize the process of how Lawrence’s invention generate electricity.

One critical problem I have forgot all along is the timing of electrical, magnetic and gravity force. Does it require time for a mass to react to another object’s gravity field? If I remember accurately, it require some time for E-M field to reach an object react to E-M field. If we could found out what time it take for such an reaction to happen, we could win a second Nobel prize.
In here, I would assume here gravity does NOT take any time to ‘travel’ from an object to another object. My hypothesis is that when kinetic energy is transfer to become electrical energy, there is a momentarily slow down of the swing. However, at the same time, the tension in the metal react to this slowing down and provide upward force require to counter gravity. And as kinetic energy is transfer to electrical energy at the same time, the tension(or construction energy) is drawn once again to support the momentum of moving upward. Then it reach the maximum it is possible to attain. This should be the place where potential energy is equal to kinetic energy plus the construction energy we exert through the circular motion.
As it begin to swing downward, the gravity is acting against the tension to push the swing downward. However, with the addition of tension resulted in a clockwise circular motion toward the point of equilibrium. Now gravity is accelerating the swing, which cutting through the magnetic lines. In that process, the kinetic energy is transfer to electrical energy. Then there should a momentarily slowing decrease of acceleration of the swing. However, as soon as the gravity ‘discover’ that swing is not accelerate(instantly) proportional to its mass(or some atoms in the swing felt that gravity is temporarily losing contact with it), a process is initialized to ‘fill-in-the-gap’ of that lose acceleration. Actually, it maybe the tension(incompressibility) of the metal first ‘detect’ this lost of gravity, therefore it react by pushing the swing outward. Therefore, I suppose that there maybe a continuously fluctuation of the acceleration and the speed of the swing that is detectable by VERY SENSITIVE equipment (provide that the equipment itself does NOT distort the parameter it want to measure). This delicate balance of gain and loss take place until the swing has reach its equilibrium point, which the accumulate enough energy to miss it. The same thing repeat itself on the other side.
Now I have two hypothesis:
1. Either the atom in the metal swing or Earth’s atom ‘detect’ and REACT to the reduction of gravity due to ‘lose’;
2. The Tension of the metal first react to the lose of gravity, and since it can’t be compress, it react by providing an impulse to push the swing object outward and downward;
3. Some complex interaction between Tension and Gravity.

Keep going this way, we are digging into the quantum reality of gravity. My general direction is by taking the microscopic picture of what really happen at each moment of the metal and swing. However, all is hypothesis without an experiment to test it, which is the first experiment I will do after the company laboratory is created. Seriously, if any of us could found an accurate description of this phenomena that is proven by experiment, the Nobel Prize of Physics within our reach. I guess you wouldn’t mind sharing a part of it to help patent my invention

Hypothesis on Inertia as the Basis of Overunity

This idea is more like a theoretical guess: The problem of neg electable. We see this term a lot in physics textbook; whether it be wave, magnetic, electrical force and gravity. If neg electable among to zero there, then I have a concept of using this source of energy.
My hypothesis is when an object with a lot of mass met an object with only 10^-5 of it’s mass. The gravity, which is theoretically bi-directional, in reality become uni-direction. What I concern here is if there exist a threshold of ratio which anything below would practically become zero in its effect? If it is the case, we see energy is transfer from the gravity of the big object to small object, and there is a net kinetic energy gain in one of them, which we could utilize it to do useful work. For instance, by applying a magnetic field across its path. It is not that momentum is not conserved, just that the reaction of the massive object is too slight that maybe the vibration within this object already canceled its effect out. The same principle could apply to electro-magnetic force. As one interesting feature is that any object moving toward the gravity well will NOT decelerate no matter how its kinetic energy is extracted to do other work. This is the theoretical explanation of how gravity electricity generator works.

Conceptual Innovation of May 27, 2005

Fri, May 27, 2005 at 11:46 AM

Innovation time at the early morning. I would like to claim the
first on the following ideas.
1. Most of the building is supported using concrete, and the cost go
up as the height of the building increase. Moreover, concrete itself
is not permanent and incorruptible, therefore would require
maintain. However, all maintain in the world can’t reverse the
process of natural decay. Unless a building is not inhabited, it would
not live forever.
There is indeed a cost-effective and permanent method to maintain
at least the support of the building for over a hundred years. It has
the added advantage that each of the floor does NOT have to be in
physically contact with other. How? We could utilize Magnetic
Repulsive and Attraction force in a clever arrangement. The concept is
very simple: Since Magnetic force is by itself a thousand time
stronger than gravity, we could effectively sustain anything on the
air using Magnetized Metal with the same polarity on the top of a
floor and on the bottom of the next floor. This is not enough to align
all floor on top of each other, four Magnetized (for square shape)
regions of a different polarity all equal distance from the intersection
of the diagonal is built-in into either the top of the floor or
bottom of the next floor. For circular shape building, we may consider
an circular shape of different Magnetic polarity. Notice that in all
case, we need to do the calculation for balancing the vertical and
horizontal components of attracting forces and the weight against the
repulsive force.
Anyhow, the conceptual innovation is to use two poles of Magnetism
of nearby floor for sustaining the physical weight of the building
while holding floors in straight alignment. What I consider as the
ideal design is a floor by floor design which each magnet doesn’t have
to be too strong, but it would be able to sustain against tornado,
typhoon. There is no way pest and thief could climb from floor to
floor, unless s/he know how to fly.
An alternative design would be using eight Magnetic Insulating
U-tube at the four corners of the building, we could actually using
the weight of the building to sustain the weight of building itself!
A disciple would be born to discuss ways, methods and technical
detail of using forces from Magnetism to sustain the weight and shape
of building against any disrupting force. And I should be consider the
founder of this disciple.

Discussion on Transformation Process

Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 8:55 PM

In Physics, most of the time we are certain about an effect without knowing the real explanation. For example, we are certain of gravity as a phenomena(things will fall on Earth), but we are uncertain of why and how(mechanism). In fact, there are many alternative gravity theories other than Newton. Curiously, they all give the same prediction on experiments, thus it is very difficult to differentiate the most accurate. From a purely theoretical perspective, an excellent theoretician can always ‘reverse-engineer’ any amount of suitable theory from a set of experiments result.Just like a good mathematician can made up any number of generic formula for a given sequences, i.e. 1,4,9,16,25 could be represent by k^2 or k(n+2)-2k(n+1)+k(n)=k(n+3)-2k

(n+2)+k(n-1), or … son on. Many theories can tailored from one observation, there is no reason why one theory must be better than other, or why existing FRAMEWORK is a better explanation. It is just one way of understanding the natural world.

So this is my understand of what really goes on in the transformation process. What we are certain are the transformation phenomena does happen( i.e. mutual induction does happen), what we are less certain is how it happen(whether our description of it is accurate.) The most uncertain part is why it happen. We can similar put forward any number of theories to compete with existing one. Only an experiment specifically designed to differentiate between the theories can distinguish the better theory.

The explanation is attached below. No graphic, sorry.

A strange experiment on falling magnet

Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 6:27 PM

illl070820

A thought experiment using Parallel Path Technology.

Double Oscillation in Electromagnetic Field?

mdosdiscussion

Discussion on Magical Transformer

Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 2:14 PM

Space-Time reversal in Magnetically opposite poles?

Parallel Path Technology is one of the alternative technology with overunity effect which is almost deployed by  US military.
In the past I had one thought experiment(and invention) on the question of directionality of magnetic current remain unresolved. The question is we currently only presuppose that magnetic current flow from North Pole to South Pole, that is arbitrary. Why couldn’t that real magnetic current flow from South Pole to North Pole?
That assumption doesn’t change anything in current electromagnetic, however, it has major impact on this technology. Since this technology require magnetic current to converge or diverge at place, then what is the real direction of real magnetic would determine where those magnetic currents converge/diverge. Now it appears to me that this discovery is applicable regardless which direction we assume the magnetic current flow, therefore it follow that the converge of magnetic current from one direction has the same effect of diverge magnetic current from another direction. How could an effect of converge become effect of diverge in another direction?

My hypothesis is related to the nature of magnetic current, it is reasonable to assume that the magnetic current flow from N to S is literally live in an inside-out space compare to the magnetic current flow from S to N. The difference between the North/South is thus much more than just opposite direction of spin in electrons. An electron is spinning clockwise is also an electron spinning anti-clockwise in an inside-out reversal of the space which the former live it. We could imagine that if we apply the geometric transformation of the motion of electrons from one space to another space, then clockwise rotation in one space would become anti-clockwise direction in another space. So the difference between South Pole and North Pole is  much much greater than what we current believed.
If we can extend this hypothesis to Electrical field, then we could hypothesize that positive charge and negative charge are space-reversal of each other. The reason that gravity doesn’t have repulsive force is that the space-reversal of positive of gravity is also positive.