Upsetting the Magnetic Balance

[floor]

No I was using an acronym to refer to "Helpful"  and "Hurtful" magnetic reactions.  When I say "Hot Zone", "Cherry Zone", I am referring to the positions where the magnetic forces work in our favor.  This was not meant to be literal.

And when I said "Stupid Magnets" I was being facetious.

Thanks. 
Maybe that was unclear to dxer_87 at first ?

[dxer_87]

But let's get back to magnetic motor. Any single magnetic wheel has this wrong point for an inventor. And you can call as you want. A'dead point', a 'sticky point'. Even if its just geometrically nice like Perendev or Minato, utilizing just one wheel won't work. So not to combine too much, you may just use more wheels screwed correctly to the shaft to defend this point. But once I saw simple wheel with mechanically triggered point when repelling magnet was moved away because the shaft had something like simple timing. So it was working with one wheel but a movement of the magnet in this dead point was necessary. The same way it works with electromagnet or as you know Bedini wheel it has timing/automation too. Looking what Yildiz motor is, yes its pure magnetic, but look closely how many wheels he utilize there. Several. I think all in all is just that simple, not going into theory much.

[floor]

But let's get back to magnetic motor. Any single magnetic wheel has this wrong point for an inventor. And you can call as you want. A'dead point', a 'sticky point'. Even if its just geometrically nice like Perendev or Minato, utilizing just one wheel won't work. So not to combine too much, you may just use more wheels screwed correctly to the shaft to defend this point. But once I saw simple wheel with mechanically triggered point when repelling magnet was moved away because the shaft had something like simple timing. So it was working with one wheel but a movement of the magnet in this dead point was necessary. The same way it works with electromagnet or as you know Bedini wheel it has timing/automation too. Looking what Yildiz motor is, yes its pure magnetic, but look closely how many wheels he utilize there. Several. I think all in all is just that simple, not going into theory much.

I personally, do not in any way, object to others making their own
investigations and explorations into these things.

Given that...
1. The first wheel does not give the desired result...
   and that

2. Being just like the first wheel, 
the next wheel and the next and the next and so on 
will not / do not give the desired result, in and of theeir selves, either.

3. One finds that one is chasing a carrot on a stick.

4. There is a vast amount, we can learn from magnet interactions,
in the explorations of the huge number of ways in which
carrots and sticks can be arranged.

[Jim Mac]

Well.... I am not so sure the carrot on the stick is right in this reference. In some way, I agree with Dex.

If we have a large stator magnet placed right with multiple magnets on the moving part-  there will always only be 1 magnet entering and 1 magnet leaving.  never more..  So we have 2 units against us.

But if there were 10 magnets within the "Helpful Zones",  the combined forces of those 10 helpful magnets "COULD" overcome the 2 working against us.

I still think my proposed design could possibly work if we have the correct stator magnet and not a cut speaker magnet.  

I think this is what DEX is referring to.  With many rotors stacked, you can arrange them so we have more supporting rotation than opposing rotation at all times

[floor]

Well.... I am not so sure the carrot on the stick is right in this reference. In some way, I agree with Dex.
If we have a large stator magnet placed right with multiple magnets on the moving part-  there will always only be 1 magnet entering and 1 magnet leaving.  never more..  So we have 2 units against us.
But if there were 10 magnets within the "Helpful Zones",  the combined forces of those 10 helpful magnets "COULD" overcome the 2 working against us.
I still think my proposed design could possibly work if we have the correct stator magnet and not a cut speaker magnet.  
I think this is what DEX is referring to.  With many rotors stacked, you can arrange them so we have more supporting rotation than opposing rotation at all times

If say,


1. A second wheel in the set up is smaller and / weaker than the first wheel.

2. The second wheel is applied pretty much just / and only in order to overcome
the stick spot found in the first wheel.

3. This results in the energy output from the first wheel being enough to overcome the 
weaker sticky spot of the second wheel, but also to have some energy
left over.

4. ? Energy storage and the release might be needed before the timing of the events
is just right ?

[Jim Mac]

Well.... I am not so sure the carrot on the stick is right in this reference. In some way, I agree with Dex.
If we have a large stator magnet placed right with multiple magnets on the moving part-  there will always only be 1 magnet entering and 1 magnet leaving.  never more..  So we have 2 units against us.
But if there were 10 magnets within the "Helpful Zones",  the combined forces of those 10 helpful magnets "COULD" overcome the 2 working against us.
I still think my proposed design could possibly work if we have the correct stator magnet and not a cut speaker magnet.  
I think this is what DEX is referring to.  With many rotors stacked, you can arrange them so we have more supporting rotation than opposing rotation at all times

If say,


1. A second wheel in the set up is smaller and / weaker than the first wheel.

2. The second wheel is applied pretty much just / and only in order to overcome
the stick spot found in the first wheel.

3. This results in the energy output from the first wheel being enough to overcome the 
weaker sticky spot of the second wheel, but also to have some energy
left over.

4. ? Energy storage and the release might be needed before the timing of the events
is just right ?

No, 2 is not enough.  See the attached image.   5 magnets.  2 are hurtful, but 3 are helpful.   Why couldn't we have 10 helpful with 2 hurtful?

As 1 travels from Hurtful to Helpful, another takes it's place in Hurtful, maintaining the 3/2 dominance

[floor]

Sorry, I was unclear.

The first and second wheels being independent of one another / magnetically isolated
but
mechanically sharing the same axle upon which they rotate.

---

Remembering that   if   is a big word.

But a third wheel in such circumstances would require less
from the first wheel than would the second wheel would have required.
A fourth wheel a fifth wheel and so on ?

Such an arrangement along the axle could bring the needed event timing
about and the energy storage might be in the form of momentum.

[floor]

Even within my crudely / poorly described above, device,
it would still be necessary to disturb the balance of the
energy gain by attraction and the energy cost of escape
in at least the first wheel.