Memory Lane

From S.H.O.
Revision as of 14:00, 4 November 2016 by S.H.O. (Talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{#seo: |title=Memory Lane @ Sho Drives Wiki |titlemode=replace |keywords=history,online,graphics,internet,science,television |description=At the Memory Lane, the discoveries...")

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

At the Memory Lane, the discoveries and efforts leading up to the S.H.O. Drive are cataloged.

Comment Record

The scope of the Memory Lane will be contingent on whether S.H.O. Drive works or not as well as depending on how the public responds to it. Sincerely, S.H.O. talk 14:00, 4 November 2016 (PDT)

Early Exposure to Science (In the 1990's)

Quasi-scientific Influences (In the 2000's)

Ideas Inspired from the Syntheses of Other Ideas (2000's to present)

Prior to development of the S.H.O. Drive, I was making electric motors, which I (loosely and erroneously) referred to as "Newman Motors", although none of them could be considered an actual replication of Joseph Westley Newman's Energy Machine.[1] I originally heard about Joseph Westley Newman's Energy Machine back on November 4, 2007.[1] Years ago, I produced many very simple electric motor devices with my limited understanding of the concepts put for by Joseph Newman in his book, the Energy Machine of Joseph Newman.[1]

Due to the complexity of the commutator design of Newman's Energy Machine, few have able to make it build it in the way that the inventor, Joseph Westley Newman, describes in his book. Even fewer built a Newman Energy Machine large enough to possess a large magnetic vector potential to operate as Newman claims. Joseph Newman does not mention the vector potential himself but one his endorsers, "Robert Joseph Matherne" did so.[2] The magnetic vector potential due to the permanent magnets Newman motors is due to an alignment of bound electron supercurrents in atomic matter. These atomic supercurrents are accurately described by the work of Dr. Randell Lee Mills.[3]

Date: March 14, 2016

Description: The Hertzian EM Hypothesis

Filename: 00029.MTS

URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33_p93xnAko

Actual Newman Energy Machines depended on a very large magnet, and it turns out that the magnetic vector potential [math]\mathbf{A} = \vec A[/math] scales with the size of the magnet even if the peak magnetic flux density [math]\mathbf{B} = \vec B[/math] does not. This year (2016), I proposed force acting on changing current densities subject to a Magnetic Vector Potential. This extra force is [math]q\nabla_\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}) = q\left[ \mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{a}/|\mathbf{v}| \right] \mathbf{\hat{v}} = q\left[ A_x \frac{∂v_x}{∂x} + A_y \frac{∂v_y}{∂x} + A_z \frac{∂v_z}{∂x} \right] \mathbf{e}_x = q\nabla_\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}) = q(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{a})\mathbf{v} / |\mathbf{v}|^2[/math] and exists due to the acceleration of a charge subject to a magnetic vector potential.[4] The associated power is [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{a}[/math], which is the rate of change of the velocity dependent potential over time due to changes of charge velocity. The "overunity" feature of actual Newman Energy Machine arises due to the different value of the external magnetic vector potential during coil charging and discharging phase.

Consider that a positive value of [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] corresponds to positive mutual inductance, which implies negative potential energy for a charge moving in a magnetic field with respect to mechanical work and a positive potential energy with respect to electrical power generated by discharging magnetic fields. Conversely, a negative value of [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] corresponds to negative mutual inductance, which implies positive potential energy for a charge moving in a magnetic field with respect to mechanical work and a negative potential energy with respect to electrical power generated by discharging magnetic fields. Thus, an increasing [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] represents a net transfer of energy from electrical energy to mechanical energy. [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] is therefore an energy transfer term, not an energy storage term.

My model can be compared/contrasted to the model proposed by Cyril W. Smith. In his model the additional new term is [math]-q\nabla_\mathbf{A}(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v})[/math], whereas the additional term in my model is [math]q\nabla_\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v})[/math] whose curl in fact the same (i.e. [math]\nabla\times\left(-q\nabla_\mathbf{A}(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v})\right) = \nabla\times\left(q\nabla_\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v})\right)[/math]. So in both cases, an anomalous force occurs. They are not the same though. The force predicted by Smith depends on acceleration, but not velocity itself. However, the force predicted by my model does depend on the velocity as well as acceleration. Which velocity should that be? In the case of free electrons in conductive metal, one could argue that it should be the thermal velocity (around 100,000 m/s)[5] rather than the drift velocity (< 1 mm/s)[6], while for electrons trapped in atomic orbitals, which are responsible for magnetism in certain materials, one may argue that the velocity one should choose is much larger (> 2 million m/s), or if the underlying charges are the result of gyroscopic particles like Joseph Westley Newman says, one may argue that the velocity one should choose should have a magnitude of the speed of light, in which case the predicted force anomaly would actually be the reaction force of the action force one would predict from a changing mass (due to changing [math]E/c^2 = \left[ q \nabla \varphi - q\mathbf{v} \cdot \mathbf{A} \right]/c^2[/math]). The predicted average power [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{a}[/math] remains unaffected by this choice, as long the average acceleration is computed over a sufficiently long time interval. The result is that regardless of the model for the velocity chosen, in the end an increasing [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] still represents a net transfer of energy from electrical energy to mechanical energy. If [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] is indeed an energy transfer term, not an energy storage term, then [math]q\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v}[/math] represents a conversion of bounded energy (i.e. mass) into unbounded energy (i.e. kinetic energy).

While this synthesis of ideas remains a work in progress, its current level of development is sufficient to justify an experiment which will either validate or invalidate the concept of a S.H.O. Drive. Sincerely, S.H.O. talk 14:00, 4 November 2016 (PDT)

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2506654B08626453
  2. https://web.archive.org/web/20030604043823/http://www.josephnewman.com/A_New_Paradigm.html
  3. http://millsian.com/resources.shtml
  4. http://www.sho.wiki/now/Electromagnetic_Potentials
  5. http://wiki.c2.com/?SpeedOfElectrons
  6. http://wiki.c2.com/?SpeedOfElectrons

Site map

HQGlossaryApril 2016 Presentation