How To Build A Magneto Magnetizer Pdf Reader
This video has been labeled a 'Faux-To'. Commonly contested as bogus science, we believe this video to be a hoax.
What's your opinion? Comment below. Regardless of what this is called, this free energy looks amazing when demonstrated. This video tutorial will show you how to make it. You can take a small electric motor from a children's toy and attach the wires to a battery to rotate the motor. What you'll need to fire up a light bulb without a battery is the motor, a light bulb, a plastic lid, super glue, Scotch tape, three matches, magnets, and wire cutters. Never pay for electric again!
Rub the needle using a magnet, a nail, or a piece of fur, which creates a small electric current. Rub the needle in the same direction at least 50 times to magnetize it. Stick the needle through the cork. Slide it in horizontally, so that the needle pierces on side of the cork and comes out the other side.
Just imagine how much money you could save if you build a big version of the perpetual energy generator in this how-to video. 'magnets are more like storage capsules for electromagnetic energy' Not even close. Once an NdFeB 'rare earth' is produced, there is very little degradation of the magnetic force. It would take a very strong magnetic force, a good deal of heat, or a LOONNNGG time to demagnetize these magnets, and until then, they continually exert the same magnetic force. Very much unlike a battery. Electromagnets temporarily align the domains of a 'soft' ferromagnetic substance using a charged solenoid.
Actually he is correct. This will only last a few hundred hours. As opposed to the months you can get out of a AA battery.
Jul 12, 2013 You want the magneto magnets to reach magnetic saturation before the coils on the charger reach saturation.The only way to do that is large coils with a lot of core mass. The Rex charger will charge any mag you can throw at it. As an experiment charged a WICO EK on an Allen charger which I think Gingery based his charger on. When the polarities of magneto and magnetiser have been ascertained, place the magneto on the magnetiser so that unlike poles are adjacent, as shown in the accompanying sketches. In the sketches, it Will be noted that some models are show with the driving end facing the viewer. Whilst in others the contact breaker is.
As the like poles exert force on one another they slowly start to align with one another. The strength of the magnetic field drops off at an inverse logarithmic rate. Meaning for 75% of the magnets life you will see no change visible to human senses. After this point the field strength drops off at an ever increasing rate. Very much like a capacitor but for magnetism instead of electricity. I tried that, but it's really not as easy as this video makes it out to be. You must angle the magnets just so, or the magnet's opposite pole will attract the drive magnet( the car track magnet).
I tried this for a science project this previous year, and very nearly didn't complete a project at all; it's catastrophic failure forced me to switch topics entirely. I was extremely dissapointed with the way my version worked- or rather, failed to work. Perhaps I did it wrong; if so, I invite all who read this to correct me. Until then, it looks to me as though this video has been labeled a 'faux-to' for good reason.SIGH. I was not a doubter (indeed, I am a biology teacher) and as my physics is not too hot and since I thought it would be a great demonstration in class, I went out and bought a wide selection of magnets and motors of various sizes to test this out. All that happens is as people have said previously, the magnets rock a little back and fourth then they stop. Even if you spin the mechanism to give it power, it stops very quickly.
I repeated this using different strength magnets and various motors and nothing happened. I would love it to have worked and am pleased I tested it myself, rather than just nay saying. Another video would be great, or start selling the set up (with a guarantee) as I want to join the celebration, but otherwise. This would not work if the magnet was fixed in place rather than hand held, subtle, constant corrections of the proximity of magnets to one an other is required to keep this moving. You are converting muscular excretion to electricity. This is no big trick, I suspect a generator on a stationary bike would produce a better ratio of expended calories to watts generated. Wendy's handed out a toy with kids meals a few months ago that was essentially the same device; It was a toy monkey (Captain Huggy Face to be exact) with a round bottom that allowed it to spin like a top and a toy remote control.
Each contained a small fixed magnet. If you place Captain Huggy Face on a table and hold the remote near by, he spins in place. If you put the remote on table, nothing happens or they stick together. It is the subtle corrections made by your eye-brain-hand that keep the two parts of toy consistently the same distance apart which in turn keeps the monkey spinning. You people are amusing. From 'China is mass producing them but big corporate bullies are keeping them down' (with no source mind you) to 'I built one years ago' (and yet didn't sell it despite the obvious fortune) this belief in perpetual motion is comical yet encouraging. This is a trick as the magnet would function more as a brake than anything else.
The only way to possibly do this would be to move the handheld magnet to and from the wheel. Even then the proportional increase to make this a viable energy source is astronomical to an unrealistic degree. Don't stop dreaming though because, who knows, maybe one day you'll defy the Laws of Physics and the world will be a wonderful place. Nice video and nice presentation, but com'on guys and gals. This is just not what it appears to be.
No different than a magic trick, once you see how its done, then you get the 'duh' results. The best observations above are the person(s) who said there is a coil or magnet pulsing source below the table. There are a few laws that are broken here. Conservation of Energy.
Incredible claims deserve incredible proof. It is up to the presenter to prove it, not the observers. Basic kindergarten science. This is cute and fun, but don't fall for it. This has been tried for centuries by some very smart peeps and all, ALL, have failed, even on a microscopic level. I don't want to discourage open thought, but please don't take this persons 'trick' video as science If you believe it, then prove it for your self before you proclaim this as real science breakthrough.
Uhh under the table? Are you guys retarted? Simple freehand magnet moving on a disc- like seriously, youre gonna tell me this person bothered creating another one powered by a battery and stuck it under that thick table and tell me that those other magnets are close enough to affect the ones on top?
Yo that sounds like a poor explanation, besides the disc spun first clockwise before going counterclockwise in correspondance to how the magnet was held in his hand in the first place. Now unless you somehow prove to me that he intentionally made a 2nd one powered by battery and intentionally tweaked so it would turn clockwise first. Now we're going overboard.
Do your friggin homework and google nikola tesla. Now if you wanna go into it deeper google torsion fields or hyperdimensional physics. Don't be so naiive as to think anyone who governs you would let you have hold of free energy ( thats way too optimistic and you know it). It's not as much as this 'new' science(actually its pretty damn old) has been avoiding us, but in fact kept from us on a global media scale(because whoever controls media controls group thought).
Long story made short. Education and particularily life as we know was designed this way, it didnt evolve this way on its own. We are just human resource afterall.
Other fields you skepticals should examine: Cymatics, quantum physics and sacred geometry. Oh yeah, it's all a conspiracy.
Tell you what genious. Make yourself a working model of this and be insanely rich. Torsion fields and hyperdimensional physics and nikola tesla? Do you even have a clue on what you're talking about? Sacred geometry? LOL FFS you dolts, if you can make it work do it and win a huge fortune or are 'The Man' keeping you down? Torsion fields.
A hoax exposed in the 90s. That has zero to do with this! Hyperdimensional physics by other no other than Richard C. Hoagland, a retard who claims advanced civilizations exist or once existed on the moon. Plus you even fail at reading.
The guy here simply powered an electric engine with a battery and that created the motion, not the magnets. Look at the speed, it's exactly the speed of the engine he showed in the first place. He doesn't have to have a second set of magnets under the table. All the needs is to connect the wires to a power source, and that is why he doesn't take the wires of the engine. They are there to hide the fact that the mechanism is externally powered. Now you cookoo heads can just prove you're right (and Physicists are wrong) just by making a commercial application of this.
Just Patent a thing like this and you'll make billions. Instead you make silly videos?! Don't you think that it is a little bit 'retarded' to think that something like this would just go under the radar of big corporations? Start using your brain, no need to wrap it in tin foil either! Torsion fields are a hoax D:?
Dude there is even an official Torsion field GRID for our planet and VISIBLE evidence of it on every planet of our solar system (every huge detectabe anomaly 19.5 degrees either south or north from the center of the planet) Yo man you're out of date. Torsion fields is just another name for hyperdimensional physics (picked up first by nickola tesli, and from which einstein had commented on himself as the new newton revolution). And god, study some history, pull your head out of your ass and go research what I said.
As for sacred geometry it goes hand in hand with cymatics which I assume you have no idea what it is. Oh another subject I suggest researching which is DMT and the Pineal gland. I watched over 200 hours of documentaries in the last 4 months. I'm not about to say all of it is true and that I understand all of it from pure firsthand experience but I can certainly say this: A true researcher will look at everything, even if it seems balooney and bogus. The point is to have a bigger picture, not to select your information. So next time you watch those educational videos and conspiracy theorists that you dont like, how bout watching it fully and not stopping after 5 minutes, eh?
OMG you're a complete utter tin foil lunatic. Nothing of what you said has actually been proven to exist and/or work. ' I watched over 200 hours of documentaries in the last 4 months. ' Imagine that, instead of wasting 200 hours seeing semi-retarded pseudo-science TV shows you'd actually studied a physics book and learn why all that BS is fake to lure in stupid people to buy #$%@.
'A true researcher will look at everything, even if it seems balooney and bogus.' Absolutely, and then a true researcher will be able to separate idiotic mumbo-jumbo from reality. You only need to go a step further. 'So next time you watch those educational videos and conspiracy theorists that you dont like, how bout watching it fully and not stopping after 5 minutes, eh?' Dude, why do you think i'm here in this specific topic?
I have as an hobby to cruise around and check out these stories and see if there is something i'm missing out on. Then i analyze their merits. All the stuff you mentioned has been done in to death. And quite honestly i could school you in sacred geometry. I've studied that BS well beyond the point of seeing it was all BS just for the fun of it. And the only reason why you think cymatics and this go hand to hand is because you haven't really comprehended why those geometric connections exist.
'Torsion fields is just another name for hyperdimensional physics (picked up first by nickola tesli, and from which einstein had commented on himself as the new newton revolution).' Apparently we are still waiting for this revolution huh?
And since You're talking about Einstein who was dead wrong on Quantum Mechanics and was himself outdated when he died and you call me 'outdated'? Have you even held a post 1950 physics book? Torsion fields, if you can comprehend what they are, do exist, but that's about it. All the work done on them is BS. Torsion fields have basically zero interaction in our world. I was talking about the crap you've certainly heard about it being Reply.
'I know I have the responsibility to share what I know ' Well, so far all you've shared was a visible vulnerability to hoaxes. ' I think you're just downright annoying for a human being.' Yeah, i know, reality really bites when you try so hard to believe in fairy tales. Guess what, i don't really care if you think i'm annoying because i don't believe in BS that has never been proven. It's that easy. You think this contraption works? Build one, make electric power out of it forever and be a billionaire.
Who is stopping you and everyone who says this works? Only one the thing i can remember. Cold hard reality and those damn physical laws. 'I just don't think you deserve to have your curiosity satied when you are trying to eliminate other people's argument's without having done a thorough research.' I've done physicis and chemistry at university level. I'm a Biology teacher. I've done more research and been around labs for years, unlike half these mofos here supporting that this works.
I'm basically inside the scientific field. Which means that i know that if someone had something amazing to show the scientific community he would.
All these people saying that somehow mainstream science are keeping them down don't have a clue. The only thing that keeps them down is the necessity to actually 'demonstrate' their work.
Every one of these perpetual motion machines fail as soon as independent review is done. They are hoaxes in search for investment.
Now, i'm not saying that a new form of energy that is super efficient and will save us from oil will not come around. I hope it will.
But these machines in violation of the conservation of energy aren't it. 'I know I have the responsibility to share what I know ' Well, so far all you've shared was a visible vulnerability to hoaxes.
' I think you're just downright annoying for a human being.' Yeah, i know, reality really bites when you try so hard to believe in fairy tales.
Guess what, i don't really care if you think i'm annoying because i don't believe in BS that has never been proven. It's that easy. You think this contraption works?
Build one, make electric power out of it forever and be a billionaire. Who is stopping you and everyone who says this works? Only one the thing i can remember. Cold hard reality and those damn physical laws.
'I just don't think you deserve to have your curiosity satied when you are trying to eliminate other people's argument's without having done a thorough research.' I've done physicis and chemistry at university level. I'm a Biology teacher. I've done more research and been around labs for years, unlike half these mofos here supporting that this works.
I'm basically inside the scientific field. Which means that i know that if someone had something amazing to show the scientific community he would. All these people saying that somehow mainstream science are keeping them down don't have a clue.
The only thing that keeps them down is the necessity to actually 'demonstrate' their work. Every one of these perpetual motion machines fail as soon as independent review is done. They are hoaxes in search for investment. Now, i'm not saying that a new form of energy that is super efficient and will save us from oil will not come around. I hope it will. But these machines in violation of the conservation of energy aren't it.
'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. ' Ok, you build one of these then, in order to test it yourself. You call out on others to test, but if you had done it yourself you would have seen that this device cannot work like it is shown at all. 'how naive to belive things just cause you read them somewhere in school.'
As opposed to believing in stuff you see on the internet on an anonymous video? ANSWER/SOLUTION: he's was performing WORK (force.distance=energy stored) when he brought the magnet (magnetic field) with his hand close to those small magnets that are repelling him as he brings it closer.
Think of it like waterfall spinning turbines in a hydro-electric plant. The potential energy was originally required to raise water to that height is then released as kinetic energy. Here he is using the force of his hand to create potential energy (like loading a SPRING).
Because the repulsive force is small, it's not 'obvious.' But he won't be able to bring a huge magnet close like that to a replica x1000 scale:). I guess we can't blame Jack Stappers.
Who knows what kind of psychological damage could be incurred from 200 hours of conspiracy theory. Just a few things to point out though: -first law of thermodynamics says we can't create energy.second law of thermodynamics says we can never have a 100% efficient machine.Magnetic fields do no work.Einstein isn't on your side.
He spent the first part of his scientific career debunking perpetual motion machines as a patent clerk in Switzerland.Really, why don't you build one of these and become the next Nobel prize for physics? Or does Sweden not have the correct fields for this machine to function? -Sometimes the majority is right - and not because they're the majority of course, but because they believe in rationally proven concepts based on evidence and extensive (peer reviewed) mathematical proofs. I have an electrical generator which has a 15,000 WATT output. It powers itself.
It doesn't need any type of fuel such as gasoline, diesel, propane, natural gas, solar power, or aquatics. All it needs is an AC battery to start it,?
And once it is started it keeps itself running. Most small houses only need about 7,500 WATTS. My invention will power a whole house. The applications are truly endless! I hope to one day to be able to give this device to the poor not living near an electrical grid.
How To Build A Magneto Magnetizer Pdf Reader For Free
Think it's more to do with magnet material and cross sectional area than HT or LT mag. Hoping for a comment from one of our magneto experts but all a bit academic anyway:- 'Thank you for your email below.
The cost on the magnetizer is $590.00. Shipping weight is about 48lbs. We can only ship this UPS or similar, due to it being a highly defined piece of electronic equipment. Shipping cost is $463.36, or you may ship collect on your own freight company.' So looking at nearly 800 quid with VAT!
My reply was a generalisation, as LT magnetos had tungsten steel magnets. Very early HT magnetos also had tungsten magnets but the majority had high magnetic steels. Up to the 1920’s horse shoe magnets were made from the toughest steel then available, Tungsten Steel Since then other strongly magnetic steels have been made, containing Chromium and Nickel up and until the 1930’s when compressed metal powders such as Alinco and Alcomax were used. Alinco consists of Aluminium, Nickel and Cobalt, hence the name. These special high energy magnetic materials are much more expensive than tungsten steel but they hold more than 20 times the magnetic energy. The tungsten magnets had to be long and thin to prevent self demagnetism, hence the large horse shoe magnets seen on the early magnetos, more compact magnets and magnetos being made when the new materials were available.
The downside to the later, non-tungsten, magnets is that they require a greater magnetic force to charge them but once they are fully charged they create a stronger magnet. Another issue with charging magneto magnets is whether or not there is direct contact between the charger and the magnet.
Magneto Magnetizer
If there is an air gap, a non magnetic casing would count as air gap, then considerably more ampturns will be needed. Yes chargers are expensive, but if you are really interested it is easy to make one, although the major cost is the spool of magnet wire!
You can find some information at Peter. When it comes to this job & you don't have a re-magnetiser, it's still a simple job to do if you've got a good long length of thin copper wire. I built a magnetiser myself some years back & if you look at this systems archive you'll probably find it & another one that a fellow member was also building between us at the same time.
I hadn't used mine for a long time & on trying to re-build a BTH mag recently it wouldn't work anymore & couldn't get a decent charge through it, so decided not to bother using it. So to re-energise the magnet; First: Insulate the magnet by winding insulation tape around it. Second: Get a long length of thin resin coated copper wire - got mine out of an old scrap electric motor. Then cut a length of insulation tape about 4' long & after moving back from the end of the wire about 5' place the tape over it & trap the wire inside leaving a 2' flap Third: place the flap on the side of the magnet & start winding the wire over it - trapping the flap underneath & stopping the wire dropping off the end of the post & leaving the 5' connection wire.
Carry on winding the wire evenly around the magnet along it's full length - keeping it tight & well compressed together to enable you to get as much wire on as possible Forth: Make a clean steel bridge ('Keeper') approx the same width & thickness as the magnet & place it on the base. Fifth: Get a compass & check the magnet's polarity & then get a well charged battery - I use two 12 volt one's myself connected in series to give 24 volt, & connect the positive wire to the battery post. Then with the bridge in place quickly SCRAPE the negative wire across the other pole causing an arce DON'T allow it to stick. The windings will heat up very quickly so perhaps do it one more time at the most & then remove the magnet from the battery.
There should certainly be one hell of a difference in the strength in the magnet 'DON'T REMOVE THE KEEPER' Sixth: After removing all the wire & insulation tape, check the polarity is correct & bring the magnet to the side of the magneto body. Then carefully slid the magnet back onto the body - removing the 'keeper' at the same time. Providing the magneto itself is complete & in good condition that should be job done - certainly worked well on that BTH that I sold which had a 5/16ths spark:righton: Steve.
You could recharge most horseshoe magnets with that charger, and magnets from the likes of an RS1 if it were taken out of the mag.To do through body magnetising, you will need the spec mentioned earlier. There was a very good little design for a similar spec to the one on sale magnetiser, sometime in the late 80s, or early 90s in the Stationary Engine Mag, by Warwick Bryce.I haven't easy access to my back issues at the mo, maybe someone else on here has. I built a Lucas Spec magnetiser about 20 years ago, and spent £200 on materials then, power requirements are 24VDC, 200A, or 48VDC 100A.I use a mains derived power supply of 48-50VDC, but the design allows for the use of two 12v lorry batteries if ever required. I am quite happy to pass on the design details of my magnetiser.here is the basic spec, the core diameters of 3 1 2 inches, approx 7 inches long annealed low carbon mild steel,and the coils comprise 350 turns each of 3.35mm diameter ennamelled copper wire.
The rectangular base is approx 5 inch x 3 inch annealed mild steel. The whole lump weighs about 160lb. This magnetiser is capable of reversing the magnet polarity of a Lucas RS1, through the body, so this gives some idea of it's capabilities. Carry on with the DIY approach Nick. Cheers Martin. Thanks Martin, shame no one in UK seems to sell such things.
I agree with you about the ebay item, even though the carriage paid offer makes it competative with new MAG24C, it is still just too much to spend. Did you get a chance to look at my previous home brew attempt any fundamental reason why it shouldn't work? EDIT; Warwick Bryce's article was published in SEM March and April 1988 - I have a photocopy tucked into my copy of Dave Gingery's book on the same subject NHH.
Dug out the old project today, re-faced top end of pole pieces which had suffered a bit with various dings. I re-counted the number of turns on the coils and measured the current draw to confirm my figures and it 'should' work. One question; I'm measuring 60 amps with a clamp ammeter before the full-wave rectifier, this will be an RMS figure so the peak current should be around 85 amps - does that mean my peak magnetising force will be 'turns times 85' or does the inductance of the coils smooth it out to the RMS figure? Dont know what the dimensions are on the unit there, or the volts supplied. If its 220ac then there's plenty to make some magnetism, and heat the room at the same time. If there is nothing going, then I would suggest that the coils have been wired up in opposing directions. Imagine bending the bottom bar to make the magnets in-line, then the turns should continue the same way throught the whole unit (if the coils are series connected).
The coils should be connected in opposite directions if they are in parallel. Apologies if I'm stating the obvious. To give you an idea of size, the pole pieces are 6' apart centre to centre and 2' diameter on top (turned down to 1 3/4' where they pass through coils). Runs off a welding transformer which gives about 22V at the coils (x60A = 1.3Kw so it's a good thing the duty cycle is low!). It's wired up correctly and indeed does magnetise magnets - just not sure it has the grunt to bring a typical magneto magnet up to full strength. At just over 14,000 Ampere-turns it is on a par with the Gingery design, though the pole pieces are perhaps a bit skinny and may be saturating before the required flux density is reached through the magnet. More experimentation required, perhaps with some quantitative tests rather than just a subjective 'that doesn't feel much better'!
Looking at the rig the available space for winding area is just not enough. The cross sectional area will determine how much grunt you can get in there, whether its a lot of windings at a high voltage or a few windings at low volts. I did do some rough calculations some time back and something like 5 1/2' length x 2 3/4' ish width each coil with about an inch coil width, making overall coil dia about 4' seemed needed to get somewhere useful. I did see a design that some chap took to rallies to re-charge magnets, but was put off by the croc clip used to power it up. It was very similar to the one on my car inspection lamp.
Just revisiting this thread in light of a link Steve posted elsewhere. One of the things this states is 'A short and comparatively thick electromagnet is more efficient than a thin one' so it looks like my 'parts of the moment' pancake coils should not be a problem. EDIT; Still like an answer to this though:-One question; I'm measuring 60 amps with a clamp ammeter before the full-wave rectifier, this will be an RMS figure so the peak current should be around 85 amps - does that mean my peak magnetising force will be 'turns times 85' or does the inductance of the coils smooth it out to the RMS figure? Working on the figures you give, it seems that you are going to use a 13volt battery or similar, feeding the 2 coils in parallel.
I guess that you would get magnetism varying in strength from zero to 85 amps, the average being 60 (RMS amps). As there would be no reversal of magnetism then I guess its not going to be a problem. The core will get a dose of 85 amps at some stages so cant be a bad thing, or use a car battery and you will know its 60 amps. Tony.No, using an old Olympic arc welder and a bridge rectifier cobbled up from all the big diodes I could find in my bit box! Clearly the resulting DC is going to be lumpy, but the question is how much higher will the peak ampere-turns be than that implied by the RMS measurement on the AC side. No, using an old Olympic arc welder and a bridge rectifier cobbled up from all the big diodes I could find in my bit box!
Lucas Magneto Magnetizer
Clearly the resulting DC is going to be lumpy, but the question is how much higher will the peak ampere-turns be than that implied by the RMS measurement on the AC side. NHH The peak ampere turns will be relavent to the 85 volts for a small portion of the time say about 10% of 1/100th of a second, (with full wave rectifier). The avereage amperage is what heats up the wiring, so the lows compensate for the highs which average out to 60 amps.
Hope that answers the question - I cant understand what concerns you have about it being periodically over spec. The current considerations of recitifiers would follow in a similar way.
Just been reading through all of this.as you said earlier Nick, it's all academic.if you've tried it and it works, and your treated maggie works to spec, then it's done the job.I possess a digital gaussmeter, and know what field strength to expect to measure inside a bog standard Lucas mag body.200 gauss or 20 milliteslas.but doe's it really help knowing, and being able to measure? No.not in the slightest. Must admit when I designed and built my magnetiser, it was designed with the number of turns to pull 100A at 48VDC for the required field strength.my clamp ammeter says 99A from full wave rectified 50VAC, so I was pleased to find out that my sums were right.even though it would have worked just as well if they weren't:) Cheers Martin.