An hypothesis on Catalyst of Catalyst

It follow from the discussion on Between Catalyst and Placebo Effect and The Placebo effect and the question of mind and matter that analogous to recursive Repression in Freudian theory to hide any trace of repression, it is necessary for the brain to evolve Catalyst for neurological process so Placebo Effect is possible. Extending this analogy, the body isn’t just what the brain deceive, in order for the deception to be complete, the brain also need to deceive other parts of the brain. Thus, following the same logic, Catalyst of Catalyst of neurological process is necessary to have such an effect. By looking at the level of catalyst, we could tell how complete is the deception(and how good is Placebo Effect approximate its target). Similarly, we could infer from this line of logic that the existence of Catalyst implied some kind of cheating in the nature (in terms of energy). Theoretically, if it is chemically possible to accelerate a chemical reaction without itself being altered; then it should be possible that there exists another substance that could accelerate the ‘chemical reaction’ of Catalyst on the original reactants. If we could discover Catalyst of Catalyst, then we could understand how complete is that cheating in nature.

Parametric Power Conversion as a general Principle for electrical generation

In my notes on Overunity Research, Lawrence has ask the question on how does the Magnet able to increase the kinetic energy of itself by first magnetize the nearby metal, then attracted toward it. Where does the kinetic energy coming from? Moreover, in the end of the process, the strength of new magnetic field of metal and magnet is greater than original, where does the extra magnetic energy coming from?

The classic electromagnetic would answer this question by considering the energy gained throughout the whole process. Since it require energy to separate the metal and magnet, therefore energy is conserved in the sense which no net energy is gained in the process. It has, however, created the need to explain how is it possible to borrow kinetic energy in the process of attraction from the later process of separation. Does nature allow we borrow energy from the future? The same question in the case of attraction between charged object and metal, the metal is also borrowing energy from the future separation. Moreover, it is not necessary that the metal is separated from the attracted object in the future. A magnet could hinged on ceiling for years without falling down, what supply the gravitational potential energy in first place?

Another set of question which often ignored by Physicist is in the case of repulsion, what supplied the kinetic energy for the repulsed object to be separate? Clearly, the logic that eliminate the need to ask the source of energy no longer applied here. Physics has to answer the question of where this kinetic energy coming from, or through what mechanism that kinetic energy is produced.

My knowledge and understanding is probably inadequate for the process of answering this mystery, I could only lied down a tentative hypothesis of my own: My speculation is that through some special alignment of Magnetic/electrical mini-poles, it is possible that the totality of attraction/repulsion has created an effect of rotation on them. Thus the kinetic energy is coming from the rotational energy of individual mini-poles. Since it is the natural states that anything rotate, therefore the rotation of them thus provided an inexhaustible supply of kinetic energy.

One of the beautiful example of utilization of this kinetic energy for the generation of electricity is known as Parametric Power Conversion, which an iron core is attracted into an electromagnetic coil. The whole setup would then experience the unusual phenomena of negative inductive. I attempt here to formula a general principle for this classes of electrical generation, or energy extraction via attraction and repulsion of Electrical/Magnetic poles. Namely, Any electrical/Magnetic pole would first elicit energy from the electrically/magnetically neutral object in the area where electrical/magnetic flux is penetrable, possibly via the aforementioned mechanism. Then we can conveniently dream up any kind of mechanism to extract the kinetic energy gained.

For instant, we can imagine a simple Magnetic energy conversion device which attraction between coils and metal is converted into electrical energy. For instance, we could have two separate system, one made of metal and coils, another made of coils and magnet. The purpose of the coil in the later system is to attract the metal in the former system when it is magnetized. At the time of their attraction, the coil in the former system and the magnet in the later system is made to approach each other by design. If we connect any loading to the coil in the former system, that load would operate as kinetic energy from the attraction is converted into electrical energy. To end this iteration, we could end the attraction between the magnetized coil from the later system and the metal in the former system by stopped supplying the coil in the former system with electricity. After the coil in the later system is demagnetized, it is quite easy to manually separate the two system. We could then repeat the whole process to generate electricity from the attraction between coil and metal. The great theoretical question that classic electromagnetic would face is, does the total of energy conserved throughout the whole process? The answer is definitely not. Could we use the electrical energy generated in the process to maintain the operation of whole system? The answer is definitely yes.

If we look at the whole process in terms of energy loss and gained, some part of electrical energy is lost as electrical resistance in the magnetization of the coil. And the inductance of the coil no doubt borrowed some electrical energy in the building up of magnetic field in the coil in the later system. Then kinetic energy is gained as the metal is attracted toward the magnetized coil, which is then converted into electrical energy through Lenz’s Law in the coil of the former system. That is where ‘extra’ energy enter into the equation. As long as this extra energy is greater than the lost in coils as electrical resistance, the system could produce more electrical energy output than its input. We thus have a simple overunity generator.

We could similarly construct other OU generator by using any attraction mechanism between electrical/magnetic poles and electrical/magnetic neutral, then use any kinetic-electrical energy conversion mechanism we could imagine. The key is that the attraction mechanism would be reversible, i.e. the coil could be separated from the metal, so we could repeat the whole process. The inexhaustible source of energy is there in the nature for thousands of years. Physics couldn’t understand it adequately doesn’t mean that we couldn’t use it at all. In the end of the day, we never took Psychology class before we become human!

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?

The process of flotation

This is written as a sequel to my last discussion on flotation, the theoretical breakthrough I have is that the gravity force acting on water molecule is NOT negligible as stated in Advance Physics. Just like air molecules, all of the water molecules is accelerating downward at 9.8/s; the only difference is a stronger bonding force between water molecules tend to wear down the effect of gravity, thus giving an impression that water is act as many layers stacked together. And the layer is responding as if it is elastic. Since gravity is unidirectional, thus the elasticity must be coming from the electromagnetic forces acting as spring between the molecules. How does that related to the process of flotation?

In my last article, I suppose that as an non-water-permeable object immersed in water, it would first push out the water molecules nearest to it. Since the gravity has a stronger effect on the object than the water molecules surrounding it, therefore it is squeezing the water molecules just beneath it. Notice that the surface tension is elicited by difference of acceleration by gravity between the object and water molecule which is also depending on the variation of the strength of the horizontal bonding force in respond to their difference in acceleration.

Undeniably, some water molecules would be accelerate downward by the object, while other pushed side-ward. While part of the later would pass the momentum sideways, other dissipate their momentum by pushing other water molecules upward, thus we see the rising of water near the immersed object. As the former travel sideways, they continually dissipate the momentum by pushing other upward or sideways. Undeniably, some of those kinetic energy lost as thermal energy. Thus, some part of gravitational energy from the object has heated up the surrounding water. If those travel sideway eventually reach unmovable solid mass like land, part of gravitational force is absorbed by land mass as heat. As the unmovable solid mass bounce back, the object immersed in water get a temporary lift. As stated in last article, some part of the weight is ‘cancel’ by water streams accelerated by the object running into each other,

The conclusion is by taken into consideration of the gravity’s effect on water molecules, part of the flotation force is coming from the rebound effect of the land mass at the bottom of ocean, part of the weight of the object is used to heating up the water.

To test this hypothesis, we can try an experiment which a heavy object with lower density than water is slowly immersed into the water inside a bottle. Then in a thermal insulated environment, we can measure the change of temperature in the process of flotation, then we can also measure the water pressure at the side of bottle. In according to the discussion above, we should expect both of them to be rise as the result. Also, we can break bottle by immersing the object if the object is massive enough.

Anyone like to do this experiment?

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.

A thought on electrons

Fri, Jul 8, 2005 at 10:07 AM

1. Hydraulic of electron flowing, why we can not apply fluid dynamic into flowing of electrons? Consider a conductor wire as a pipe, what will happen?
2. Since electron has mass, the direct consequence is that we see massive relocation of mass in any transmission line; theoretically we should also see the change of net gravitational acting force as a result. Why we not observe anything?
3. If we applied a strong electrical charge to polarize a metallic object, since proton is considerably heavier than electron, should the object be heavier on one side than other?
(Do you still not understand the point of experiment concerning horizontal or vertical placed electronics? It is the evidence for or against the theory you accept. )

Innovation on energyfromair at Apr 22, 2005

Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 11:34 PM

This is yet another Patent claim by Euler. After my attempt to
create a mechanism that could use the rotational motion of one mass to
shift the rim of another circular mass, I now created an invention not
just able to shift the rim of another circular mass then return to its
original position, but also extracting gravitational energy in the
process. So it is really the process of a rotational object shift a
swing to shift yet another rotational object. I got two conceptual
innovation from that:
1. Theoretically, this process could take place interminably, and each
rotation would increase in speed and magnitude, thus drawing more and
more gravitational power (Power= energy/time), until we reach the
physical limit of the rotating object.
2. With a little modification, we could change the direction of
rotation of the second rotating object. We could thus control where
and to which direction the pulse force is applied.
3. By placing this device in different angle, we can control the
phasing of the pulse force. Now imagine if there is a simple way to
change the angular location with respect to the center of the first
rotating object.
4. Imagine if this device is itself rotating around the first rotating
mass and connected to another rotating mass, because of yet another
pulse force. We would observe that the second rotating mass is
changing its rotating frequency in sync of the frequency of the
rotation of this device.
5. By placing the same device in many different angles with respect to
the center of the first rotating object, we can control the timing of
the pulse force in a different way from 3.
6. With yet another modification, we could also change the frequency
of the pulse force applied compare to the rotational frequency of the
first object, as well as the strength of the pulse force compare to
the torque of the first rotational object.
7. By connected many of this device in many angle with respect to the
center of the first rotating object to many other independently
rotating mass, we can control the phase of pulse force in many
different rotating mass.

To summarize, I found a way to control the phase, frequency,
strength , the power output and the direction of the pulse force
applied to any number of rotating masses connected via this device. If
we could found a way to feedback the second rotational momentum to the
first one, we should see the world’s self-accelerating physical
system. And we should expect this system reach its maximum capacity
within 5 feedback cycle. Who say we can’t use the swing to push yet
another swing to yet another swing…?
With the combination of pulse circuit and clever engineering, I
could produce something much much more powerful than electrical
control could produce. Who is to say I shouldn’t feel proud of myself?

My thought on Gas Law

Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 12:44 AM

Yet another idea of today is about gas law. Something we haven’t
notice for a long time: the effect of the walls. As in every moment
the wall is bombard with gas particles. And in each collusion, the gas
particle is changing its course of motion. i.e. A force was exert by
the wall to those air molecules every time a particle collide with the
wall. Where does this impulse come from? The electromagnetic ’spring’
of each atom in the wall. Since the wall itself doesn’t move by the
gas, we see gas particle is continuously extracting electromagnetic
energy from the solid wall, just we may not notice. Since the wall
itself doesn’t become fatigue after containing a gas for a long time,
we have reason believe this is yet another source of inexhaustible
energy. The only problem is that we have not yet develop a good way to
harvest it.
The extension of this observation is the shape of the container does
affect this interaction process. So in some rather inaccessible area
of the container, we would expect a low air pressure, in some readily
accessible area of container, we would expect a high air pressure. The
distribution of air pressure itself is a measure of probability of
reaching there through random movement. On the other hand, the shape
of an container could change the distribution of air pressure by
changing the probabilities of different component vector of air
molecules as a whole being reinforced. A container symmetry in all 3
dimension would likely cancel out all the work done by the container
to the air molecules as a whole. An asymmetry in one dimension of the
container could be serve as a reinforcer of impulse for the air
molecules as a whole toward the opposite of this direction. By doing
this on purpose, we have a container that would drive the direction of
air molecule. Moreover, if the shape of that container is changeable,
then we could choose which vector component that we would like to
reinforce, causing increase in air pressure toward desired direction
inside or outside the container. We could control the average of air
pressure in whatever direction we like by changing the shape of
container.

Wind idea on Mar 17, 2005

Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 12:01 AM

(Read of this e-mail means consent to the following terms: No
disclosure to anybody else, No patenting from any of the idea here or
its derivative without written consent from this writer.)

This is a concept I conceive yesterday, and it could applied to any
transmission of wave. We could applied the principle of how a
polarized filter reduce the transmission of light wave to zero. Two
polarizer is 90 degree on top of each other. The implementation on
air wave(wind) is simple: One vertical obstacle to break down the air
wave vertically, another horizontally placed obstacle break down the
rest of air wave horizontally. If the theory of the polarization of
wave is right, we should have no wave energy(wind) left after it pass
through these two obstacles.

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.