Motor-Generator
Author: RexResearch
Eastern Bay News (1-18-2001)
Applied Modern 20th Century Aether Science(Excerpts)
UK Patent # 2,282,708 (Adams & Aspden)
Nexus Magazine (August-September 1993)
Nexus Magazine (December-January 1993)
Nexus Magazine (June-July 1995)
The Golden Ratio Motor Generator
Adams Special Release of Information...
Miscellaneous Notes by Dr Adams
Tim Harwood's Replication
Keelynet BBS Discussions
New Energy News (December 1996): H. Aspden
Alternative Energy Institute (July 17, 2002): Adams vs. Lutec
Biodata of Robert AdamsLinks:
Robert Adams' Website: http://www.aethmogen.com
Kits: http://www.butlerlabs.com/es.htm
Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/free_energy/
Aether Energy an Alternative - Claim
A Whakatane-based scientist believes he is helping to create one of the greatest breakthroughs in human history. Denise Landau talks alternative clean energy production with one of the world's leading energy scientists.
After a lifetime devoted to researching alternative clean energy production Dr Robert Adams is about to publish his latest work which shows that aether, the building block of the physical universe, can be freely harnessed to produce clean, pollution-free energy.
Now aged 80, Dr Adams and his colleagues new work delivers mankind on to the doorstep of an unimaginably exciting and awe-inspiring future.
Take any image of science fiction and open your mind because that's the direction this new world of aether energy is offering, says Dr Adams.
He is internationally recognised as one of the world's five leading scientists in the field of research into the new clean energy technologies.Aether scientists believe their discoveries effectively eliminate the theories of relativity and traditional views of physics and cosmology.
An international network of maverick "behind the scenes" scientists, such as Whakatane's Adams, is on the brink of publicly challenging the traditional Western scientific establishment.
They sincerely believe that the Earth's and the human race's very survival depends upon it.
Dr Adams says many ancient cultures were aware of the power of aether energy and used it for their people's and the environment's betterment.
So what is the aether and how can it be applied to our lives today?
Scientists describe aether as a superfluidic particulate medium which pervades all space - it is the building block of the physical universe. The medium, in one of its forms, is responsible for gravity and inertia.
They even go so far to say it is a medium controllable by mind and can be manipulated by thought.
Does a memory from the movie, Star Wars, and its mystical element illustrated by the Force ring any bells here?
Scientifically, these "outside the square" thinking individuals call themselves new energy scientists and Dr Adams latest book is entitled Special Update 2000 edition of Applied Modern 20th Century Aether Science.
"This new energy technology is going to change the world we live in on an immense scale."
Dr Adams formally lays claim to discovering a new law of Nature, which he designates 'the Adams Law'.
"I have proved over hundreds of thousands of hours of hard labour at laboratory benches and machine shops, that these aethric energies are manifesting at unity/zero point, whereby the bottom line is that there is no longer any reference point from which to base any kind of so-called 'efficiency' test."
Dr Adams' latest invention does read like something taken straight out of a Star Trek episode - the Adams triplex aethric energy motor generator.
This device is a super power, thermo, impulse, salient pole, open magnetic circuit, repulsion, self-starting, reluctance electric motor generator.
The motor generator is so named because of it's unorthodox and unusual ability to manifest considerable aetheric energy from three different areas of the machine.
He says the revolutionary machine, the first of its kind in the world, provides economical, clean, safe power.
What it means, says Dr Adams, is every fossil-fuelled and nuclear power station in the world could be shut down in the space of three years.
Dr Adams talks about expanded inductive energy and energy harnessed at the air gap between his machine's rotors and stators. These two elements combined provides the driving power of the motor.
"The important roles played by these two sources of force have never before been properly highlighted.
"They have eluded mainstream academia and scientists for over a century in regard to their vital importance in machine design, and this explains why electric motors have never beer improved upon during these past 100 or so years."
He adds that it is incredible to realise that electrical engineers and scientists in this modern age of technology are still taught to use free trapped electromagnetic energy to destroy the source of the said energy, by placing these 'stone age' motors across the national grid systems and/or battery energy sources.
"In this brutal way, millions of megawatts of energy is wasted daily throughout the world and there is no excuse for allowing such a monstrous waste to persist any longer."
His supporting written documentation includes papers written by eminent scientific pioneers in ferromagnetics and aether technology, including the United Kingdom's pioneering engineer Dr Harold Aspden.
Dr Adams says his book contains the revelation of the century and is packed with undeniable evidence of the presence of the aether and it's awesome powers.
This exploration into the vast frontier of aether energy science technologies also outlines part of his own journey through the corridors of a fascinating and challenging world of new, clean, safe and inexhaustible source of energy, he says.
Dr Adams shares his own vital discoveries and experiences from a lifetime of critical analyses on the subject in conjunction with his collaborating colleagues world-wide.
He includes scientific papers written by scientists of eminence and international repute as pioneers in the fields of ferromagnetics and aether technology.
Dr Adams also deals with his own sceptics - with reverence and caustic soda alike - and includes some of their narratives.
The book is a biography and a significant contribution to the history of modern day true science, a record if discovery and innovation which is fertile and absorbing, he believes.
"In writing this special update I am donating into the public domain further valuable information.
"This is particularly for the benefit of those interested in the new, clean free energy sciences with the view to fostering encouragement for these people, to join in the rank of their pioneers by collaborating and sharing information on an international basis."
Four years ago, former New Zealand Minister of Energy, Doug Kidd, publicly stated his belief in the concept of "over unity" machines operating in laboratories overseas at an address to the annual general meeting of The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority.
Mr Kidd referred to the almost science-fiction field of over-unity where new machines recorded output power at 28 times greater than input power from the likes of the Patterson power cell and where power continues to be produced long after the input source is turned off.
"I'm not talking about nuclear power," Mr Kidd explained. But the restrained anarchist lurking deep inside me is tickled by the thought that your line monopoly ... could become worthless junk, as would the dinosaur at Huntly and the large hunks of concrete we call hydro stations would become marginal stations.
"According to accepted notions of physics, it is not possible. But once upon a time it was accepted wisdom that the sun revolved around the Earth. Your life depended on believing it!"
Applied Modern 20th Century Aether Science[Out of Print]
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Preface
Acknowledgement of Commendation
Introduction by Author's Wife
Tapping Nature's Clean Inexhaustible Energy With the Adams Technologies
Letter to a New Zealand MP, the Hon Peter Hodgson (Energy Minister)
Politics and New Energy. (Excerpts from previous Energy Minister's (Hon Doug Kidd's) Address 1996)
Personal Reply from the Hon. Doug Kidd to the Author
Thermodynamics and Free Energy by Dr. Peter A. Lindemann
Thermo Motor Generator (publication in NZ Electrical Focus, 1997)
A Sceptic Writes
Adams Writes
Cynicism
Correspondence From Another Sceptic (Graham Keith)
Adams' Reply to Keith
Usages of Physics and the Inventor's Health, by Paulo N Correa
The End of Fossil Fuels by The Arlington Instutute, USA
Excerpts from the Author's Publication Aug/Sept 1993 (Nexus International Magazine)
Introduction into Applied Aether Energy Science
On the Phenomena of Wattless (Currentless) Power
Aether Energy
Electrical Energy Generation and the Vital Role Played by Temperature and Time Factors...
Translocating Potential Gradient to the Motor
Unity, Zero Point, Over Unity, Over 100% and Various Other Definitions...
Aetheric Electrical Technological Science and the Adams Connection
The Adams Thermo Motor Generator (1)
Diagrams of Mosfet Calorimeter and Water Heat Power
Ohms Law
Input Power Measurement and its Significance in the Adams Technologies
The Dispatch of Ohms Law in the New Dimension of Clean Energy Technologies
Tesla, Adams, Ohms Law and The Aether
Adams' Technology Proves Tesla's Discoveries...
Diagram of Mosfet and Load Resistant Calorimeters
Diagram of Calorimeter Test
Power From Room Heat by Dr. Harold Aspden
The Adams Thermo Motor Generator (2)
The Adams Triplex Aetheric Energy Motor Generator
Correspondence to & from Radio WBAI Pacifica, NY - Kaku, Williams, Adams, Lindemann
"Have We Discovered the Neno?" by Dr. Harold Aspden
The Adams - Aspden Motor Patent
The Impending Energy Crisis by Dr. Harold Aspden
The Secret of the Adams Moter by Dr. Harold Aspden
"Do We Really Understand Magnetism?" by Dr. Harold Aspden
Switched Reluctance Motors by Dr. Harold Aspden
Reluctance Motor Has 100% Plus Efficiency, Electrical Review, U.K. 1993
Adams Motor Analysis Report and Graphs, L. Low, USA
Free Energy, Gravity and The Aether by Dan A. Davidson (Excerpts)
What is ........ Aether? (Excerpts)
The Light Centre (David Saltrese, Wales)
Machine Test Run Analyses (Examples)
More Correspondence from Dr. Lindemann
Revelation of the Myths of 'Unity' and Beyond
On The Matter of Excess Heat Manifestation
The Energy Metamorphisis
Excerpt from 'The Harmonic Conquest of Space' by Capt. Bruce Cathie
Prologue to 'The Transistor Enigma'
Introduction to 'The Transistor Enigma'
Who Invented the Transistor and When Was it Originally Invented?
The Truth Must Prevail
A Summary - Shulman's Roswell Expectations and the Bell Boys
Appendix to 'The Transistor Enigma'
Champion of Aether Energy by Lenora Anderson
Imagine your own plant at home, business, factory, milking shed, etc., to name but a few of the scores of sites and applications for such a device. Sounds like a dream?No, it is no dream. Development of such a technology has been on-going right here in New Zealand in the Bay of Plenty for some years now by an internationally recognized scientist by the name of Dr. Robert Adams of Aethmogen Technologies.
Unprecedented progress is underway worldwide on new energy devices. Such devices will one day in the near future pave the way to the time when we will see an end to pollution. Such devices will play an enormous role in the doing away with the monstrosities we call power stations which presently interfere with our waterways and, especially in the case of the coal and oil fired stations polluting the air we breathe. Hydro stations with their pylons and substations straddling the countryside will meet a similar fate. The time will come when grid systems will not be sustainable even to the most affluent of nations and the world will have to turn to simpler and more cost effictive alternatives. Power stations, just as the computer industry has done, will downsize quite dramatically and continue to do so rapidly until establishments such as hospitals, universities, factories, etc., will no longer be their guests. Eventually the smaller new energy devices will accommodate these guests and they will become self-sustaining as will individual residents who will be able to own and operate their own power supply at a "one-off" cost and store these individual units quite comfortably in their basements or garages.Dr. Adams has authored a new book on his own technologies titled "Special Update 2001 Edition of Applied Modern 20th Century Aether Science". This book covers the subjects of nature and pollution, politics, the environment, hte scientific establishment with its false teachings, aether energy technologies ond devices, modern calorimetric aether power measurement techniques, thermo-moter-generators, aetheric energy from mosfets and magnets, conventional electric motors and generators, etc.
Dr. Adams has, for over fifty years, had serious concerns over environmental pollution, having himself been involved at the coal face with power plants in New Zealand in his younger years. This concern has underwritten a virtual lifetime of work researching alternative energy. His concerns for his own country go deep - he states:
"New Zealand has, over many decades now, persistently exhibited a complex of lethargy towards its inventors and innovators in general - the sad and inevitable outcome if this attitude, as seen iover recent television programmes, has seen hoardes of the creme de la creme desert these shores carrying with them their innovations to a much greater recognition and prosperity overseas. There are various reasons which contribute to nil growth in any particular regoin in the world, but the most lamentable is when a country or region ignores its own potential. Only of late, (perhaps as late as the last few years - and this probably because of media scrutiny and attention) has this shameful trend begun its reversal in New Zealand. I say "begun" because it is barely noticeable. Let New Zealand only hope it has not regressed too far before it can catch up with its overseas cousins is this regard. In my own situation, well in excess of a ball-park 95% of the recognition I have enjoyed from my work has come from international quarters, that being from the United Kingdom, USA, Hong Kong, Japan, Sri Lanka, Australia, Canada, Russio, Sweden and Austra and I have not to this day placed myself on the internet - yet!"1
The universal pace for economical and, more important, clean, pollution free energy has seen the passing of laws in California USA requiring that ten percent of all cars sold, starting in the year 2003, be zero emission vehicles. Other American States have followed suit, creating a potential market for fuel free automation. The race has well and truly begun in the new energy arena with the burgeoning European and Asian laboratories following the lead and turning their attentions from the purification of fossil fuels to the interrogation of alternative energy sources.
The electrical machine technology, developed in New Zealand by Dr. Adams of Aethmogen Technologies, in its various invented forms, is ideally suited to application in rural areas where there are expensive line charges for power supply, or no power access at all, as in remote locations.
The system can also be adapted to the provision of steam power with which to run turbines, steam central heating systems in homes, business complexes, industrial plants, hospitals, hotels, airports, etc.
The system is adaptable to all motive power requirements, i.e., from marine applications right on through to agricultural, horticultural, fisheries, forestry, major earthworks, aeronautical and aerospace projects. Its applications are widespread, land, sea and air.
For Greater Marine Safety
A boon to all boat owners and operators, whether their craft be dinghys, launches, yachts, tri-marans, luxury or ocean liner vessels, clean safe energy supply is now available for motive power, power for heating water, with additional supply for cooking, lighting and general heating purposes on board. The dangers and risks associated with using on board fuel and gas can now be totally eliminated. This clean power of the future is safe (no risk) and does not subject the environment to any interference whatsoever. It also has the unprecendented advantage of an as yet unprocured economical dominance over all other power alternatives.
Quotation - from Dr. Harold Aspden PhD, BSc, FIEE, FIMech E, MInst P, C. Eng, C.Phys. Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, England:
"...there seems no reason why the Adams motor cannot be developed rapidly for general use." (1994 - 1996).
Since Dr. Aspden undertook his evaluation of the Adams technology and came to the above conclusion, the development of three different machine types have been completed and are now ready for aesthetic design formats to be considered with consequent construction for production purposes to follow.
Introduction into Applied Aether Energy Science
With the advent of harnessing aetheric energy with the applied Adams Technologies, it poses a difficult task to know the best possible starting point with which to describe this almost as yet virtually unknown technology in the mainstream of electrical sciences.
The decision I have taken is to commence at the grass roots, so to speak.
It all started during 1969 when I first determined to use permanent magnets to construct an electric motor generator that would defy Lenz's law and, in so doing, invent an electrical machine that would run at unity and, so too, in turn, defy certain other orthodox laws.Before going on further, I feel you should all be aware of the reason why I decided to turn my attentions to developing a device which would display characteristics that would serve to exhibit that there were better ways of acheiving access to power or energy without recourse to man-made laws. I had long ago decided that ultimately all man-made laws required re-examination at one time or another and could never remain static in time - as time itself has constantly proved. Man-made laws, in particular those of physics and the allied sciences, have no path to follow, in that they tend to remain finite and exhibit the distinct inability to contain the characteristic of flexibility, which they must contain if they are to grow and expand at all, let alone grow and expand at the same pace of the human mind. Had the human mind taken upon itself the identity and stoliditude of these man-made Laws, the human condition would be a sad and sorry one today. Long enough had man subjected himself to the time-weary stagnant laws of physics and the electrical sciences and it seemed to me that in order for real progress to be made in this field, someone had to be brazen enough to stomach the inevitable sticks and stones and forge onwards to a totally new mentation. I had followed, throughout my many years of experience and constant studies, the works of other pioneers in other countries who had been theorising (more than experimenting in a practical sense) new ideas and hypotheses and it occured to me over and again that these scientists and inventors were trying to equate these new ideas with endless reams of unsuccessful calculations and equations based on the sacrosanct (and aging) man-made electrical and associated laws. I made up my mind that this was going to change, and change dramatically, if I was going to have anything to do with it. Many of these new pioneers, I felt, were (and are, even to this very day) trying to put new ideas up against old (and unfortunately still reigning) regimes and methods, which came into vogue long before the days of the great Leonardo da Vinci.
And so I started quietly to work according to the Laws of the Universe and Nature and along the way over the years I made some rather astonishing discoveries of my own which, at times, bowled me quite over, and still do. As time went on, empirical findings made me bold enough to come out of my shell and go public with my results of experimentation and discoveries - quietly at first. This was both good and bad for me and I was eventually forced to anticipate and indeed prepare myself for the onslaught to come. Come it did - of course!
What I was doing was an affront to every respectable teaching institution on the surface of the planet. Scores of electrical engineers and physicists bombarded me ad nauseum with the dogma, for instance, that, with my devices, I would get absolutely nowhere without closing the loop. At lectures this was one of the greater thorns in the sides of my contemporaries. Very few indeed were those attendees who gave this matter any in-depth thought at all, and those who did (brush away the cobwebs), as I lectured on, slowly nodded, quietly smiled and shouted no more (in the way people do when suddenly visited by an affliction of the dropped penny syndrome) ; they just listened with greater intensity and keen interest until the end of the lecture, when stunned murmering grew rapidly to an ever increasing buzz of heated dissertation and debate which, incidentally, rang through the lecture chambers long after I had departed. Such lectures, especially those (most) which were accompanied by at least an hour and more of question and answer sessions between the attendees and myself, were always a great joy for myself and I can say, with more than a little satisfaction, never boring for the attendees.So it is for all my readers today to understand that, although the walk has been long, thorny and arduous at times, the journey has been one of the utmost intrigue, fulfillment and discovery wherein I have experienced many surprises myself. Red rags have turned to green lights, frustration to reward and, in the end, all quite good fun.
I describe matters now pertaining to calorimeters because, as we progress, it is found that they are vital instruments for this technology - so much so that I purport them to be the only accurate means of measuring power generated/harnessed within these devices of the Adams technologies. This fact, came to be because of the great difficulty in having to engage in applying empirical knowledge to working with this technology, as orthodox theories/methods are of no value whatsoever in the design and construction or testing of these super machines.
Late 1995 - 1996 heralded in the successful and sophisticated "Adams Thermo-Motor Generator" entering the kilowatt range at greater power and performance. In addition during that period many various types of calorimeters were also designed and built by myself. Experience, intuition and empirical knowledge has since led to new discoveries and more sophisticated and accurate calorimeters.These complex ramifications of coefficients, specific heat, thermal conductivity, convection, radiation, absorption, insulation losses, have, ad infinitum, in their path of time immemorial, created ongoing contention to this day.
One special unit I will mention, but briefly, as it is on the classified file, is the Equilibrium Calorimeter. Now if equal masses of copper and water are heated, for instance, over flame, for equal periods of time, the temperature of the copper rises ten times as fast as the temperature of the water, and to cause the same temperature change of the water, it would have to be heated ten times as long. This massive variance, in addition to other factors to be accounted for, results in the necessity of tedious calculations which all have their resultant and inevitable error factors.To put the matter to rest for my own sake, I turned to inventing a water calorimeter that would dispense with 'calculations' and need only to rely on 'measurements'. (Measurements can be relied upon; calculations, in calorimetry involving water, can not!). This is, then, the Equilibrium Calorimeter mentioned above.
In this type of water calorimeter, a small quantity of water and a short operation time is of paramount importance. The unit itself is unique in that its load heating element heats both the water and copper vessel simultaneously and as the machine being tested operates in the kilowatt range, a state of equilibrium in the calorimeter is very rapidly reached after switch on of the machine, and remains so to boiling point or any desired temperature. The copper vessel containes only 0.5 litre of water with a boiling point time of 2.0 minutes. The fact that all componentry and water reaches equilibrium so rapidly, ensures that the resultant accuracy and performance of the unit is such that insulation loss is so low for such a minimal period of time, it is negligible and can therefore be dismissed. The end result of this calorimeter invention procludes all doubtful calculations and therefore requires but three measurements only to be taken - those of mass, temperature and time - all of which, with the application of modern measuring methods, are extremely accurate, resulting in an overall maximisation of machine/device 'zero point' performance measurement, possibly never before attained.
Extensive variations of current are possible and are, to say the least, of considerable proportions - upwards and beyond some 70%>. As stated previously, in my recent papers, I am confident that the current can be still further reduced.
The figures indicated at the end of this chapter show clearly that there is an anomaly which appears to defy a conclusive explanation of where the missing current (according to Ohms Law) has departed to! In reality, due to the subliminal velocity of the aetheric energy gaseous flow over the surface of the windings, the current becomes "lost" and, therefore, left behind.
In 1976 I discovered the machine delivers massive heat power to an external load upwards of 600%> above input power, this power then does not register in the machine or in the line load and must therefore be calorimetrically measured. This power is known as "wattless/currentless power".To understand this phenomenon, one must be conversant with "Tesla Aether Energy Science". Current-less power was described by Tesla in 1889 in his radiant energy transformers, but he never got around to putting it to practical use. It is to be noted, at this point, that I am the original discoverer of the phenomena of currentless power in the "Adams" motor generator.
I quote herein by Gerry Vassilatoss in his 'Secrets of Cold War Technology' published by Borderlands Sciences Research Foundation, P.O. Box 220, Bayside C.A. 95524 U.S.A. 1996, (page 38 paragraph 2):
"The Fractionation of Electric Currents ~ Voltage pulses traversed the secondary surface like a gas pulse under increasing constriction. Until reaching the free end of coil, these gaseous pulses flowed over the copper surface rather than through it. Tesla referred to this specific manifestation as 'the skin effect'. In this the discharge greatly resembled the manner of gasses in motion over surfaces."
It is impossible to comprehend this 'Tesla Technology' without considerable knowledge of the Aether. One must seek out and study the proofs, of which there are now many, that have been established by experimenters worldwide. It is a technology capable of being explained through gas dynamic analogues. The fact that even partial elimination of electrons from Aether currents takes place, indeed spells out that this is a new kind of electricity which could find no resolution in present electrical science. This new energy technology is going to change the world we live in on an immense scale.
To understand Tesla Aetheric Forces Technology, one must eliminate the notion that electrons are the working gremlins of electrostatic energies, for in this technology they are no longer the working gremlins. We are considering here an entirely different kind of electricity, endowed with totally different characteristics which, therefore, requires a new and different approach to the method of measuring the performance of any devices created as a result of the development of this technology, as the disparity between the two is immense.
An Adams D.C. Impulse Electric Motor can be designed in such a way that the succession of charge and discharge impulses develop energy of such magnitude that it may be possible to have control of the flow of conventional electricity electrons through the complex metallic lattice of the very long length of wire used in the stator system, due to its super luminal velocity, of which the gaseous pulse flows over the coil surface. This then would provide us with an electric motor that requires very little current at nominal voltage whilst yet delivering considerable power.
There are certain parameters required to be implemented which do not apply to conventional D.C. electric motors - those of repulsive impulsing operating potential, stator winding resistances, winding wire size and quantity and machine construction materials, etc. The established gaseous electrostatic electricity moves over the surface of the winding's wire at a super luminal velocity. This creates an enormous surge leaving the slower moving electrons behind and, hence, a consequent reduction in current flow is possible, according to machine parameter variables applied.
Electrical Energy Generation & The Vital Role Played by Temperature & Time Factors When Calculating Machine Performance
In considering the above we should first look at the question of "how is electrical energy generated?" To begin with we must dispose of the myth that electromagnetic machines generate electrical energy as is taught in our schools and universities by the establishment. So called "electric generators" do not generate electric power per se. They are mechanical devices which, due to their rotational field, act as a gating mechanism, tapping the aetheric energy field within the air gap between the machine stator and rotor, and delivering that energy externally in the form known to us as 'electrical energy'. This energy is ever present (omnipresent, as previously explained) but the machine must be in motion to harness it, not generate it.
NOTE: In the interests of simplicity for the reader , however, I will continue, in this paper, to use the words "generate/generated/generator" as the words are used in their normal and general context.
In electric motors we have the interesting situation whereby we apply stored, or 'generated' electric power to supply motive force to do mechanical work. The motor is, however, also reliant on aetheric energy from the air gap of the device for rotational power.From the foregoing, it is clearly evident that if the AETHER did not exist, as the establishment and Newtonians would have us believe, then there would be no aetheric force and, therefore, no manner of electric motor or generator would function, as there would, in turn, be no action at a distance, no lines of force, no magnetic fields and hence no Universe!
On translocating potential gradient to the charged mass in a circuit element and sourcing it via impulse to the motor, will amplify the inherent magnetic unified charged mass and, for a finite time, retard, or very nearly block off electron flow, thus precluding current flow; this is termed the relaxation time of the mass of the circuit element, i.e., in this case, the motor stators including windings. There are at least two possible methods of causing a finite delay time thereby retarding current flow within the stator element, in addition to impulsing the source - one, of using doped winding wire (at present a difficult one) and - two, in designing the stator/s by incorporating sacred geometry, i.e., PI and PHI involving the Golden Ratio.There is massive trapped energy in many natural materials, especially metals. Latent magnetic energy is ever present in these materials and this energy I describe within the structures of electric motors is found to play an important role together with that of the energy harnessed from the small air gap between the rotor and stator sections; this applies to both motors and generators alike.
The collector element will then become a secondary battery being used in a conventional manner to power a load, which does not affect the primary source. This power so provided in the external load is free and sourced in such a way that the prime mover source is not being brutalised as where, in conventional motors, they are designed to do just that and are, in turn, themselves brutalised with resultant high temperature and extremely poor performance. Bluntly, their role is that of destroying their own source of potential gradient and eventually destroying themselves.Power source applied to electric motors expands the ever present covert electromagnetic flux of the metal materials, i.e., the iron core and copper windings. It is not the impressed energy applied to the motor that creates the inductive field, as taught in universities and colleges alike; the magnetic flux field "already" exists in its natural state within the stator system; the application of energy into the system simply "expands" the natural latent inherent inductive energy residing therein.
This expanded inductive energy, in conjunction with the energy harnessed at the air gap between the rotor and stators, provides the driving power of the motor. The important roles played by these two sources of force have "never before" been properly highlighted. They have eluded mainstream academia and scientists alike for over a "century" in regard to their vital importance in machine design and this explains "why" electric motors have "never" been improved upon during these past 100 odd years.
The role played by these two forces require "more investigation and understanding" in the part they play in magnetism and inductance as applied to electric motors. The design parameters concerning these two forces far outweigh the importance of I²R losses.
It is incredible indeed to realise that electrical engineers and scientists in this modern age of technology are still taught to use free trapped electromagnetic energy to destroy the source of the said energy, by placing these flintstone motors across the National Grid Systems and/or battery energy sources. In this brutal way, millions of megawatts of energy is wasted daily throughout the world in the manner described above and there is no excuse for allowing such a monstrous waste to persist any longer. Every fossil fuelled and nuclear power station in the world could be shut down in the space of three years.
Unity, Zero Point, Over-Unity, Over 100% & Various Other Definitions Describing Performance of New Energy Devices
There is a problem with the above definitions, but that is not the fault of people like ourselves in the New Energy field - it is the fault of false teachings and mind entrenchment of the methods adapted for the performance testing of grossly inefficient conventional electric machines.
I do not subscribe to the definitions of "over 100% EFF" or "beyond unity". There can be no "beyond unity" as the totality of the Universe is Unity. This then tells us that conventional electrical machine "efficiency testing proceedures" adapted to the testing of new energy devices can only be described as bizarre and are of no substance whatsoever. New mentation must evolve whereby our new energy devices' performances are 'measured' in accordance with the truth and not with man-made laws and "presumptions" still in vogue today.
The definitions of "over unity", "beyond unity", etc., are so much in use in present day New Energy Science that in some of my writings I opted for the status quo in using such terms myself as the task of de-programming our thinking on the matter is still very much in its embryonic state. In this updated version of my writings I have made more of an effort to break the mould of using such terminology as to continuing to do so can only retard any progress and confuse the reader and young student.
Since it is proven that the Adams Technologies, as applied to the Adams Electric Motor Generator inventions, violate OHMS LAW, the use of conventional instrumentation and of OHMS LAW itself, for evaluation of performance, results in gross errors. The heart of the problem here, lies in the fact that standard electricity, as we know it, is a totally different kind of energy to that which is directly gated from the aether, the nature of this energy being such that it does not respond to conventional electrical instrumentation, nor does it obey OHMS LAW. This orthodox instrumentation is found to be grossly in error, just as is the application of OHMS LAW itself for power measurement, simply because the basic design of the said instrumentation used INVOLVES OHMS LAW!
This then heralds in the need of an ocean of new electrical scientific teachings, in order to accommodate these new technologies into electrical engineering texts for colleges and universities.Firstly, a NEW MENTATION must take place, where teachers and students alike will need to de-programme their present knowledge of conventional electricity to that of electricity harnessed from the aether. It is time NOW for our future young student scientists and electrical and electronic engineers to study this vast new clean and inexhaustible source of energy along with its massive implications and applications.
This discovery of the VIOLATION OF OHMS LAW is monumental and unprecedented, but also goes further in that it renders all conventional digital and analogue instruments as obsolete tools for use in this new technology. Instrument manufacturers worldwide will also require to re-programme their mentation in order to enter this new dimension of technology and proceed to formulate new instrumentation with which to take the place of their predecessors. This will pose a difficult task, as the Adams Technologies have violated other so-called LAWS of science.It is on account of the aforegoing ambiguous circumstances that I resorted to calorimetry for measuring input and output power, in doing so, dispensed with the need for any of the unreliable instrumentation or OHMS LAW itself and thus, too, as an aside, relegating obscurantism back into the realm of darkness from whence it came, since measurements made in the science of calorimetry are indisputable. Realistically, since calorimetric measurements have been proven to be the only accurate and reliable means of proving unity and power measurement, then orthodox electrical instrumentation has become dispensible in this new era of technology.
The question then arises, as it inevitable must as a natural consequence of the problem, "Do we need new instrumentation at all?", in view of the probability existing that any new design structure of such new instrumentation could create some rather insurmountable obstacles not encountered with the use of calorimetry.
Input Power Measurement & Its Significance in the Adams Technologies
In relation to the measuring of input power to the Adams motor generator, where the question of differentiating between the heat produced by the motor section and the heat produced by the generator section, particularly where the motor generator is one integral unit, there poses a controversial situation of "how best to calculate the measurement" if the measurement "is determined calorimetrically"?
In reality, it is irrelevant to measure the quantities of heat of either sections in any case.
I made the decision some years ago to abandon trying to differentiate between the two measurements and, in so doing, put an end to the unnecessary laborious hours spent in complex calculations by measuring total heat power and to simply consider any heat energy not harnessed as an additional loss together with other normal losses.This is entirely acceptable for the very reason that "all" losses are of no consequence whatsoever in this technology, as the machine in question is operating in the dimension commonly known and referred to in scientific circles as "Zero Point", i.e., energy generation being "infinite" with power incrementally increasing with time, as the calorimetric graph indicates. [Ed - unprinted on web]
I refer the reader, at this point, to an internationally recognised scientist in applied aetheric energy technologies, one Dr. Peter Lindemann of the USA, who quotes to me in correspondence of October 16 1999 :-
"Thank you for the package of your latest writing. In my humble opinion, it is the best material I have seen to date. Your documentation on the violation of Ohms Law is monumental! Congratulations. Also, your eloquent defense of yourself and others in the field is masterful. Spoken as the real leader you are.
Now that you know, with confidence, that Ohms Law only operates within a narrow window, and that once outside this window, it begins to fail as a useful method to calculate accurately, the behaviour of certain equipment, such as your machines, surely you can now better appreciate what I have stated in the past, that we do not know what the real equivalences are between electrical work as Watt-Hours, heat work as BTUs, and mechanical work as Foot-Pounds. If we really do not know what the equivalences are, then we cannot calculate conversions between these units of measure! I really do not know how to make this point more emphatically!"
And, in further correspondence , he quotes :-
"There is also another way of looking at the 'efficiency' of your machine. Your machine recovers all of the electrical input. Then, it also produces mechanical energy and heat energy. Since no mechanical work or heat is put into the machine, these outputs represent and INFINITE PERCENTAGE GAIN over the zero amounts put in......more than enough to irrefutably crush conventional explanations! Absolutely spectacular! You are liberating real work from the aether!
Since we really don't know the 'equivalent' values of electrical mechanical heat in real units, it seems best to measure inputs and outputs for each energy manifestation separately. In this way, your machine shines like a beacon toward a new horrizon. It also begs the question - 'Since your are getting all of the electricity you put in back out, where does the heat and mechanical energy come from?' This way of looking at it shatters any hope of finding an explanation within the 'conversion' or 'efficiency' ideas of the 'First Law of Thermodynamics'. The real efficiency of your machine is UNKNOWN because it proves that nothing is being converted into anything else. Energy affects are simply APPEARING FROM 'the aether', 'nowhere', 'counter space'. 'the Zero Point' ... you name it. The truth is, we still don't know how best to do it.
What we can measure is: Voltage (potential difference) ~ Temperature (thermal difference) ~ Mass (weight or atomic volume) ~ Distance (length) ~ Time (duration).
The cross product between temperature and mass gives us WORK units of Calories or BTUs. The cross product of distance and mass gives us WORK units of Foot-Pounds or Dyne-Centimeters, which can also be expressed as Joules. (1 Joule = 0.7375 foot-pounds = 107 Dyne-Centimeters). Watts are defined as a "Joule per second" or as volts times amperes. This makes a Joule also equal to a Watt-Second by definition. But since "current" and "resistance" are generated by calculation according to Ohm's Law, the Watt-Second cannot be measured as a unit of electrical work, it can only be measured as a unit of mechanical work. Without Ohm's Law, there is no way to determine WORK in electrical machinery, unless you resort to Calorimetry. Then and only then, can you measure things again, and get away from calculating. This is what you are already doing, which is exactly correct!" (Peter A. Lindemann, Borderland Sciences Research Foundation, U.S.A.)
This device is a super power, thermo, impulse, salient pole, open magnetic circuit, repulsion, self-starting, reluctance electric motor generator. The "Adams Triplex Aetheric Energy Motor Generator" is so named in view of its unorthodox and unusual ability to manifest considerable aetheric energy from three different areas of the machine.
The stator system, with its ability to reach high temperatures very rapidly, is designed to harness this heat from the cores of the stators via water circulation. The second source of energy is derived from loading the machine as a generator.
Temperature, material types and geometric secrets which govern the high output power and performance of the Adams Thermo-motor Generator.This is a super power machine, the first of its kind in the world, with the capability of manifesting massive heat power internally in such a way that it precludes any damage due to heat affecting the rare earth magnets in its rotor system. The rotor is designed and engineered in such a way that it gates massive aetheric energy in the form of heat which is transferred by the rotor system to the water jacket system of the machine stators. The machine rotor carries out this operation whilst itself remaining relatively cool - at most, a few degrees above ambient - whilst the heat which is manifested on load is capable of reaching into hundreds of degrees and kilowatts of power. On account of the foregoing mastered conditions of temperature control and transfer of manifested power to the stator water jacket system, the life span of the rare earth magnets remains unchanged, i.e., no deterioration takes place. The rotor of this super power machine was invented late 1995 and perfected into a machine in early 1996.
In comparison to an orthodox machine constructed of standard materials, this machine consists of different materials in its make-up of construction, the materials of which are of specific geometric dimensions, mass, etc., and so placed geometrically inside the rotor as to gate the awesome aetheric power that is inherrent in the 1.25mm air gap of the machine and to deliver it, in the form of heat and/or electric power, to a load.
There are three sources of heat energy manifested in the Adams Thermo-motor Generator version and all three are physically isolated from each other. These three heat sources appear at :-
The Thermo-motor Generator, (whereby heat is transferred via water through pipes to a seperate calorimeter) ;
The Machine Mosfet Calorimeter, (heated by energy manifesting at the mosfet) and -
The machine Load Equilibrium Calorimeter (heated by the electrical loading of the machine).
The machine Load Equilibrium Calorimeter is the vital measuring instrument in the line-up, as it MEASURES the output power of the machine proper. The other two heat manifestations are by no means small and are free spin offs which can be readily harnessed.
The Adams Aetheric Energy Electric Motor-Generator Technologies, over the past ten years, have heralded in new innovations that have culminated in very significant discoveries including that of the use of certain materials not normally used in the construction of orthodox electrical machines, resulting in the manifestation of massive power, in the form of heat, from the Thermo-motor-generator designs, at undreamed of ratios of input power to output power.
There are now "proven" natural laws pertaining to energy which render the orthodox "assumptions" of the establishment down to the realms of the obsolete and, however troublesome to accept, include those contained in the hypotheses traditionally served at the banquet hall tables seated by Einstein's Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, The Laws of Thermodynamics, Lenz's Law, Ohms Law and others. The truth of the entire situation is that I, Robert G. Adams, have proved, over hundreds and thousands of hours hard labour at the laboratory benches and machine shops, with the aid of intuition and empirical knowledge, that these aetheric energies are manifesting at unity/zero point and whereby the bottom line is that there is no longer any reference point from which to base any kind of so-called "efficiency" test. So the word "efficiency", with regard to aetheric energies simply cannot possibly apply because the only way by which to calculate the "efficiency" of the omnipresent would be to draw up scales of astronomical mathematical proportions that such scales would ultimately become eternal and infinite, and totally impossible to monitor, police or keep track of. Utterly beyond the ability of mankind. And so the term "efficiency" cannot ever be applied to "aetheric energy ", or, for that matter, the technology/ies invented or created by which mankind may have the capability to gate or harness it. And so the term "efficiency", here in the case of aetheric energies, becomes a nonentity forever and a day, and I hereby lay claim to the original discovery and, indeed, acknowledgement of this "Law of Nature" and hereby designate this discovery "The Adams Law". The 'Adams Law' also encompasses many other discoveries I have made pertaining to Ohms Law, Lenz's Law, etc.The seed of original doubt of the explanations given me from my peers in relation to magnetism, electromagnetism, inductance, magnetic radiation - became apparent to me at the age of nine years and, for some reason convinced me that there was something unaccounted for. Hence, as aforementioned, as time progressed, I made up my mind that a change had to come about and that sacrosanct orthodoxy had to be the victim of that change. Yes, difficult as it would have been for the Ceasars to comprehend, let alone possibly accept, even the mighty Rome had to fall - one day.
This device is a super power, thermo, impulse, salient pole, open magnetic circuit, repulsion, self-starting, reluctance electric motor generator. The "Adams Triplex Aetheric Energy Motor Generator" is so named in view of its unorthodox and unusual ability to manifest considerable aetheric energy from three different areas of the machine.
The stator system, with its ability to reach high temperatures very rapidly, is designed to harness this heat from the cores of the stators via water circulation. The second source of energy is derived from loading the machine as a generator.
The heat in the stator system is present whether the machine is run in a no-load or loaded condition. When loaded, however, the heat in the stator system increases rapidly and "continues" to do so during the period of operation.
A further and third source of aetheric heat energy is manifested at the mosfet. This heat is also harnessed by the heating of water. This mosfet is set inside the copper storage vessel (or calorimeter) for measurement purposes.The total heat from all three sources can reach upwards of eight (8) times the input/heat power.
A unique method of successfully transferring the heat from the stator system is water circulation within the stator cores and, as the stators are water cooled, it provides protection for the windings from burning out ; this is of paramount importance because as the machine is running "at unity" the heat manifesting at the stators "continues" to rise with time. The water so heated is circulated with the aid of an electronic pump which transports it to a holding tank/calorimeter for measurement purposes.
In addition to the unique structure of the stator system, is that of the rotor. The rotor was invented and perfected during 1996. Its materials, in addition to the magnets and the dimensions and geometrical placements of the said materials, are vital to the massive manifestation of heat that results from its structure and that of the stator system and its technological parameters. The rotor, however, playing the major role, remains the coolest part of the machine.
This machine is revolutionary and the first of its kind in the world and provides economical clean safe power. In an actual domestic application installation the machine would, of course, have a common holding hot water cylinder which would receive all three sources of the aetheric heat energies manifest within the machine componentry.
UK Patent # 2,282,708 ELECTRICAL MOTOR-GENERATOR
( 12-04-1995 )by
Harold Aspden (UK) & Robert George Adams (NZ)
Date of Filing: 30.09.1993 // Application No: 9320215.8INTeL6: HO2K 29/0823/5223/66/I HO2K 1/27UKCL(Edition N): H2A AKC2 AKR 1 AK1O8 AK12O AK12 1 AK200 AK214R AK2 165 AK217R AK3O2B AK3O3R AK800Documents Cited:GB 0547608 ~ US 5258697 ~ US 4972112 ~ US 4873463Field of Search:UK CL (Edition M) H2A AKRR AKR1 AKR6 AKR9
INT CL5 HO2K 23/62 29/08 29/10 29/12 53/00 57/00Agent and/or Address for Service: Harold Aspden, Acres High, Hadrian Way, Chilworth, Southhampton, UK SO16 7HZRobert George Adams: 46 Landing Rd., Whakatane, New ZealandAbstract -- An electrodynamic motor-generator has a salient pole permanent magnet rotor interacting with salient stator poies to form a machine operating on the magnetic reluctance principle. The intrinsic ferromagnetic power of the magnets provides the drive torque by bringing the poles into register whilst current pulses demagnetize the stator poles as the poles separate. In as much as less power is needed for stator demagnetization than is fed into the reluctance drive by the thermodynamic system powering the ferromagnetic state, the machine operates regeneratively by virtue of stator winding interconnection with unequal number of rotor and stator poles. A rotor construction is disclosed (Fig 6, 7). The current pulse may be such as to cause replusion of the rotor poles.
Field of Invention
This invention relates to a form of electric motor which serves a generating function in that the machine can act regeneratively to develop output electrical power or can generate mechanical drive torque with unusually high efficiency in relation to electrical power input.
The field of invention is that of switched reluctance motors, meaning machines which have salient poles and operate by virtue of the mutual magnetic attraction and / or repulsion as between magnetized poles. The invention particularly concerns a form of reluctance motor which incorporates permanent magnets to establish magnetic polarization.
Background of the InventionThere have been proposals in the past for machines in which the relative motion of magnets can in some way develop unusually strong force actions which are said to result in more power output than is supplied as electrical input.
By orthodox electrical engineering principles such suggestions have seemed to contradict accepted principles of physics, but it is becoming increasingly evident that conformity with the first law of thermodynamics allows a gain in the electromechanical power balance provided it is matched by a thermal cooling.In this sense, one needs to extend the physical background of the cooling medium to include, not just the machine structure and the immediate ambient environment, but also the sub-quantum level of what is termed, in modern physics, the zero-point field. This is the field associated with the Planck constant. Energy is constantly being exchanged as between that activity and coextensive matter forms but normally these energy fluctuations preserve, on balance, an equilibrium condition so that this action passes unnoticed at the technology level.Physicists are becoming more and more aware of the fact that, as with gravitation, so magnetism is a route by which we can gain access to the sea of energy that pervades the vacuum. Historically, the energy balance has been written in mathematical terms by assigning 'negative' potential to gravitation or magnetism. However, this is only a disguised way of saying that the vacuum field, suitably influenced by the gravitating mass of a body in the locality or by magnetism in a ferromagnet has both the capacity and an urge to shed energy.
Now, however, there is growing awareness of the technological energy generating potential of this field background and interest is developing in techniques for 'pumping' the coupling between matter and vacuum field to derive power from that hidden energy source. Such research may establish that this action will draw on the 2. 7K cosmic background temperature of the space medium through which the Earth travels at some 400 km/s. The effect contemplated could well leave a cool vapour trail' in space as a machine delivering heat, or delivering a more useful electrical form of energy that will revert to heat, travels with body Earth through that space.
In pure physics terms, relevant background is of recent record in the August 1993 issue of Physical Review E, vol. 48, pp. 1562-1565 under the title: 'Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum', authored by D.C. Cole and H. E. Puthoff. Though the connection is not referenced in that paper, one of its author's presented experimental evidence on that theme at an April 1993 conference held in Denver USA. The plasma power generating device discussed at that conference was the subject of U. S. Patent No. 5,018,180, the inventor of record being K. R. Shoulders.
The invention, to be described below, operates by extracting energy from a magnetic system in a motor and the relevant scientific background to this technology can be appreciated from the teachings of E.B. Moullin, a Cambridge Professor of Electrical Engineering who was a President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers in UK.
That prior art will be described below as part of the explanation of the operation of the invention.
The invention presented here concerns specific structural design features of a machine adapted for robust operation, but these also have novelty and special merit in a functional operation. What is described is quite distinct from prior art proposals, one being a novel kind of motor proposed by Gareth Jones at a 1988 symposium held in Hull, Canada under the auspices of the Planetary Association for Clean Energy. Jones suggested the adaptation of an automobile alternator which generates three-phase a. c. for rectification and use as a power supply for the electrics in the automobile. This alternator has a permanent magnet rotor and Jones suggested that it could be used, with high efficiency gain and torque performance, by operating it as a motor with the three-phase winding circuit excited so as to promote strong repulsion between the magnet poles and the stator poles after the poles had come into register. However, the Jones machine is not one exploiting the advantages of the invention to be described, because it is not strictly a reluctance motor having salient poles on both stator and rotor. The stator poles in the Jones machine are formed by the winding configuration in a slotted stator form, the many slots being uniformly distributed around the inner circumference of the stator and not constituting a pole system which lends itself to the magnetic flux actions to be described by reference to the E.B. Moullin experiment.
The Jones machine operates by generating a rotating stator field which, in a sense, pushes the rotor poles forward rather than pulling them in the manner seen in the normal synchronous motor. Accordingly, the Jones machine relies on the electric current excitation of the motor producing a field system which rotates smoothly but has a polarity pattern which is forced by the commutation control to keep behind the rotor poles in asserting a continuous repulsive drive.
Another prior art proposal which is distinguished from this invention is that of one of the applicants, H. Aspden, namely the subject of U.K. Patent No. 2,234,863 (counterpart U.S. Patent Serial No. (4,975,608). Although this latter invention is concerned with extracting energy from the field by the same physical process as the subject invention, the technique for accessing that energy is not optimum in respect of the structure or method used. Whereas in this earlier disclosure, the switching of the reluctance drive excited the poles in their approach phase, the subject invention, in one of its aspects, offers distinct advantages by demagnetization or reversal of magnetization in the pole separation phase of operation.
There are unexpected advantages in the implementation proposed by the subject invention, inasmuch as recent research has confirmed that it requires less input power to switch off the mutual attraction across an air gap between a magnet and an electromagnet than it does to switch it on. Usually, in electromagnetism, a reversal symmetry is expected, arising from conventional teaching of the way forward and back magnetomotive forces govern the resulting flux in a magnetic circuit. This will be further explained after describing the scope of the invention.
Brief Description of the Invention
According to one aspect of the invention, an electrodynamic motor-generator machine comprises a stator configured to provide a set of stator poles, a corresponding set of magnetizing windings mounted on the stator pole set, a rotor having two sections each of which has a set of salient pole pieces, the rotor sections being axially spaced along the axis of rotation of the rotor, rotor magnetization means disposed between the two rotor sections arranged to produce a unidirectional magnetic field which magnetically polarizes the rotor poles, whereby the pole faces of one rotor section all have a north polarity and the pole faces of the other rotor section all have a south polarity and electric circuit connections between an electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings arranged to regulate the operation of the machine by admitting current pulses for a duration determined according to the angular position of the rotor, which pulses have a direction tending to oppose the polarization induced in the stator by the rotor polarization as stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby the action of the rotor magnetization means provides a reluctance motor drive force to bring stator and rotor poles into register and the action of the stator magnetization windings opposes the counterpart reluctance braking effect as the poles separate.
According to a feature of the invention, the circuit connecting the electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings is designed to deliver current pulses which are of sufficient strength and duration to provide demagnetization of the stator poles as the stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position.In this regard it is noted that in order to suppress the reluctance drive torque or brake torque, depending upon whether poles are converging or separating, a certain amount of electrical power must be fed to the magnetizing windings on the stator. In a sense these windings are really 'demagnetizing windings' because the polarity of the circuit connections admit the pulse current in the demagnetizing direction. However, it is more usual to refer to windings on magnetic cores as 'magnetizing windings' even though they can function as primary windings or secondary windings, the former serving the magnetization function with input power and the latter serving a demagnetizing function with return of power.
According to another feature of the invention, the circuit connecting the electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings is designed to deliver current pulses which are of sufficient strength and duration to provide a reversal of magnetic flux direction in the stator poles as the stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby to draw on power supplied from the electric current source to provide additional forward drive torque.
According to a further feature of this invention, the electric current source connected to stator magnetizing winding of a first stator pole comprises, at least partially, the electrical pulses induced in the stator magnetizing winding of a different second stator pole, the stator pole set configuration in relation to the rotor pole set configuration being such that the first stator pole is coming into register with a rotor pole as the second stator pole separates from its in register position with a rotor pole.
This means that the magnetizing windings of two stator poles are connected so that both serve a 'demagnetizing' function, one in resisting the magnetic action of the mutual attraction in pulling poles into register, an action which develops a current pulse output and one in absorbing this current pulse, again by resisting the magnetic inter-pole action to demagnetize the stator pole as its associated rotor pole separates.
In order to facilitate the function governed by this circuit 10 connection between stator magnetizing windings, a phase difference is needed and this is introduced by designing the machine to have a different number of poles in a set of stator poles from the number of rotor poles in each rotor section. Together with the dual rotor section feature, this has the additional merit of assuring a smoother torque action and reducing magnetic flux fluctuations and leakage effects which contribute substantially to machine efficiency.
Thus, according to another feature of the invention, the stator configuration provides pole pieces which are common to both rotor sections in the sense that when stator and rotor poles are in-register the stator pole pieces constitute bridging members for magnetic flux closure in a magnetic circuit including that of the rotor magnetization means disposed between the two rotor sections.
Preferably, the number of poles in a set of stator poles and the number of rotor poles in each section do not share a common integer factor, the number of rotor poles in one rotor section is the same as that in the other rotor section and the number of poles in a stator set and the number of poles in a rotor section differs by one, with the pole faces According to a further feature of the invention, the electric current source connected to a stator magnetizing winding of a first stator pole comprises, at least partially, the electrical pulses induced in the stator magnetizing winding of a different second stator pole, the stator pole set configuration in relation to the rotor pole set configuration being such that the first stator pole is coming into register with a rotor pole as being of sufficient angular width to assure that the magnetic flux produced by the rotor magnetization means can find a circuital magnetic flux closure route through the bridging path of a stator pole and through corresponding rotor poles for any angular position of the rotor.
It is also preferable from a design viewpoint for the stator pole faces of this invention to have an angular width that is no greater than half the angular width of a rotor pole and for the rotor sections to comprise circular steel laminations in which the rotor poles are formed as large teeth at the perimeter with the rotor magnetization means comprising a magnetic core structure the end faces of which abut two assemblies of such laminations forming the two rotor sections.
According to a further feature of the invention, the rotor magnetization means comprises at least one permanent magnet located with its polarization axis parallel with the rotor axis. The motor-generator may include an apertured metal disc that is of a non-magnetizable substance mounted on a rotor shaft and positioned intermediate the two rotor sections, each aperture providing location for a permanent magnet, whereby the centrifugal forces acting on the permanent magnet as the rotor rotates are absorbed by the stresses set up in the disc. Also, the rotor may be mounted on a shaft that is of a non-magnetizable substance, whereby to minimize magnetic leakage from the rotor magnetizing means through that shaft.
According to another aspect of the invention, an electrodynamic motor-generator machine comprises a stator configured to provide a set of stator poles, a corresponding set of magnetizing windings mounted on the stator pole set, a rotor having two sections each of which has a set of salient pole pieces, the rotor sections being axially spaced along the axis of rotation of the rotor, rotor magnetization means incorporated in the rotor structure and arranged to polarize the rotor poles, whereby the pole faces of one rotor section all have a north polarity and the pole faces of the other rotor section all have a south polarity and electric circuit connections between an electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings arranged to regulate the operation of the machine by admitting current pulses for a duration determined according to the angular position of the rotor, which pulses have a direction tending to oppose the polarization induced in the stator by the rotor polarization as stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby the action of the rotor magnetization means provides a reluctance motor drive force to bring stator and rotor poles into register and the action of the stator magnetization windings opposes the counterpart reluctance braking effect as the poles separate.
According to a feature of this latter aspect of the invention, the electric current source connected to a stator magnetizing winding of a first stator pole comprises, at least partially, the electrical pulses induced in the stator magnetizing winding of a different second stator pole, the stator pole set configuration in relation to the rotor pole set configuration being such that the first stator pole is coming into register with a rotor pole as the second stator pole separates from its in-register position with a rotor pole.
Brief Description of the Drawings
Fig. 1 presents magnetic core test data showing how the volt-amp reactance power required to set up a constant magnetic flux action in an air gap, as assured by constant a. c. voltage excitation of a magnetizing winding, falls short of the associated power of the potential implicit in the force action across that air gap.Fig. 2 depicts the test structure to which Fig. I data applies.
Detailed Description of the Invention
The fact that one can extract energy from the source which powers the intrinsic ferromagnetic state is not explicitly evident from existing textbooks, but it is implicit and, indeed, does become explicit once pointed out, in one textbook authored by F. B. Moullin.
His book The Principles of Electromagnetism published by Clarendon Press, Oxford (3rd Edition, 1955) describes on pages 168-174 an experiment concerned with the effect of air gaps between poles in a magnetic circuit. The data obtained are reproduced in Fig. 1, where Professor Moullin shows a curve representing a. c. current input for different air gaps, given that the voltage supplied is constant. In the same figure, Moullin presents the theoretical current that would need to be applied to sustain the same voltage, and so the related pole forces across the air gap, assuming (a) no flux leakage and (b) that there is complete equality between inductive energy input and the mechanical energy potential for the magnetization that is established in the air gap in a quarter-cycle period at the a. c. power excitation frequency.The data show that, even though the level of magnetic polarization is well below the saturation value, being confined to a range that is regarded as the linear permeability range in transformer design, there is a clear drop-off of current, and so the volt-amp reactive power input needed, as current increases, compared with that predicted by the mechanical potential built up in the air gaps.
Unless leakage flux is excessive, here was clear evidence of anomalous energy activity.
Moullin discusses the leakage flux inferred by this experiment but points out that there is considerable mystery in why the effect of a small gap, which should certainly not result in much flux leakage in the gap region, nevertheless has an enormous effect in causing what has to be substantial leakage in the light of the energy discrepancy.
Moullin did not contemplate that energy had been fed in from the zero-point field system and so he left the issue with the statement that it was virtually impossible to predict leakage flux by calculation.
He was, of course, aware of magnetic domain structure and his argument was that the leakage flux problem was connected with what he termed a 'yawing' action of the flux as it passes around the magnetic circuit. Normally, provided the level of polarization is below the knee of the B-H curve, which occurs at about 70% of saturation in iron cores of general crystal composition, it requires very little magnetizing field to change the magnetic flux density. This is assuming that every effort is made to avoid air gaps. The action involves domain wall movements so that the magnetic states of adjacent domains switch to different crystal axes of easy magnetization and this involves very little energy change.
However, if there is an air gap ahead in the flux circuit and the magnetizing winding is not sitting on that air gap, the iron core itself has to be the seat of a progressive field source linking the winding and the gap. It can only serve in that sense by virtue of the lines of flux in the domains being forced to rotate somewhat from the preferred easy axes of magnetization, with the help of the boundary surfaces around the whole core. This action means that, forcibly, and consequential upon the existence of the air gap, the flux must be carried through the core by that 'yawing' action. It means that substantial energy is needed to force the establishment of those fields within the iron core. More important, however, from the point of view of this invention, it means that the intrinsic magnetic polarization effects in adjacent magnetic domains in the iron cease to be mutually parallel or orthogonal so as to stay directed along axes of easy magnetization. Then, in effect, the magnetizing action is not just that of the magnetizing winding wrapped around the core but becomes also that of adjacent ferromagnetic polarization as the latter act in concert as vacuum-energy powered solenoids and are deflected into one another to develop the additional forward magnetomotive forces.
The consequences of this are that the intrinsic ferromagnetic power source with its thermodynamic ordering action contributes to doing work in building up forces across the air gap. The task, in technological terms, is then to harness that energy as the gap is closed, as by poles coming together in a reluctance motor, and avoid returning that energy as the poles separate, this being possible if the controlling source of primary magnetization is well removed from the pole gap and the demagnetization occurs when the poles are at the closest position.
This energy situation is evident in the Moullin data, because the constant a. c. voltage implies a constant flux amplitude across the air gap if there is no flux leakage in the gap region. A constant flux amplitude implies a constant force between the poles and so the gap width in relation to this force is a measure of the mechanical energy potential of the air gap. The reactive volt-amp power assessment over the quarter-cycle period representing the polarization demand can then be compared with the mechanical energy so made available. As already stated, this is how Moullin deduced the theoretical current curve. In fact, as his data show, he needed less current than the mechanical energy suggested and so he had in his experiment evidence of the vacuum energy source that passed unnoticed and is only now revealing itself in machines that can serve our energy needs.
In the research leading to this patent application the Moullin experiment has been repeated to verify a condition where a single magnetizing winding serves three air gaps. The Moullin test configuration is shown in Fig. 2, but in repeating the experiment in the research leading to this invention, a search coil was mounted on the bridging member and this was used to compare the ratio of the voltage applied to the magnetizing winding and that induced in the search coil. The same fall-off feature in current demand was observed, and there was clear evidence of substantial excess energy in the air gap. This was in addition to the inductive energy that necessarily had to be locked into the magnetic core to sustain the 'yawing' action of the magnetic flux already mentioned.
It is therefore emphasized that, in priming the flux 'yawing' action, energy is stored inductively in the magnetic core, even though this has been deemed to be the energy of flux leakage outside the core. The air gap energy is also induction energy. Both energies are returned to the source winding when the system is demagnetized, given a fixed air gap. If, however, the air gap closes after or during magnetization, much of that inductive energy goes into the mechanical work output. Note then that the energy released as mechanical work is not just that stored in the air gap but is that stored in sustaining the 'yaw'. Here, then is reason to expect an even stronger contribution to the dynamic machine performance, one that was not embraced by the calculation of the steady-state situation.
Given the above explanation of the energy source, the structural features which are the subject of this invention will now be described.
The 'yawing' action is depicted in Fig. 3, which depicts how magnetic flux navigates a right-angled bend in a magnetic core upon passage through an air gap. By over-simplification it is assumed that the core has a crystal structure that has a preferred axis of magnetization along the broken line path. With no air gap, the current needed by a magnetizing winding has only to provide enough magnetomotive force to overcome the effects of non-magnetic inclusions and impurities in the core substance and very high magnetic permeabilities can apply. However, as soon as the air gap develops, this core substance has to find a way of setting up magnetomotive force in regions extending away from the locality of the magnetizing winding. It cannot do this unless its effect is so powerful that the magnetic flux throughout the magnetic circuit through the core substance is everywhere deflected from alignment with a preferred easy axis of magnetization. Hence the flux vectors depicted by the arrows move out of alignment with the broken line shown.
There is a 'knock-on' effect progressing all the way around the core from the seat of the magnetizing winding and, as already stated, this harnesses the intrinsic ferromagnetic power that, in a system with no air gap, could only be affected by magnetization above the knee of the B-H curve. Magnetic flux rotation occurs above that knee, whereas in an ideal core the magnetism develops with very high permeability over a range up to that knee, because it needs very little power to displace a magnetic domain wall sideways and promote a 90°(Degree) or a 180°(Degree) flux reversal. Indeed, one can have a magnetic permeability of 10,000 below the knee and 100 above the knee, the latter reducing progressively until the substance saturates magnetically.
In the situation depicted in Figs 2 or 3 the field strength developed by the magnetizing windings 1 on magnetic core 2 has to be higher, the greater the air gap, in order to achieve the same amount of magnetization as measured by the voltage induced in a winding (not shown) on the bridging member 3. However, by virtue of that air gap there is potential for harnessing energy supplied to that air gap by the intrinsic zero-point field that accounts for the magnetic permeability being over unity and here one can contemplate very substantial excess energy potential, give incorporation in a machine design which departs from convention.
One of the applicants has built an operative test machine which is configured as depicted schematically in Fig. 4. The machine has been proved to deliver substantially more mechanical power output than is supplied as electrical input, as much as a ratio of 7:1 in one version, anc it can act regeneratively to produce electrical power.
What is shown in Fig. 4 is a simple model designed to demonstrate the principle of operation. It comprises a rotor in which four permanent magnets 4 are arrayed to form four poles. The magnets are bonded into four sectors of a non-magnetic disc 5 using a high density polyurethane foam filler and the composite disc is then assembled on a brass spindle 6between a split flange coupling. Not shown in the figure is the structure holding the spindle vertically in bearings or the star wheel commutator assembly attached to the upper shaft of the spindle.
Note that the magnets present north poles at the perimeter of the rotor disc and that the south poles are held together by being fimly set in the bonding material.
A series of four stator poles were formed using magnetic cores from standard electromagnetic relays are were positioned around the rotor disc as shown. The magnetizing windings 7 on these cores are shown to be connected in series and powered through commutator contacts 8 by a d. c. power supply. Two further stator cores formed by similar electromagnetic relay components are depicted by their windings 9 in the intermediate angle positions shown and these are connected in series and connected to a rectifier 10 bridged by a capacitor 11.
The rotor spindle 6 is coupled with a mechanical drive (not shown) which harnesses the torque developed by the motor thus formed and serves as a means for measuring output mechanical power delivered by the machine.
In operation, assuming that the rotor poles are held initially off-register with the corresponding stator poles and the hold is then released, the strong magnetic field action of the permanent magnets will turn the rotor to bring the stator and rotor poles into register. A permanent magnet has a strong attraction for soft iron and so this initial impulse of rotation is powered by the potential energy of the magnets.
Now, with the rotor acting as a flywheel and having inertia it will have a tendency to over-shoot the in-register pole position and that will involve a reverse attraction with the result that the rotor will oscillate until damping action brings it to rest. However, if the contacts of the commutating switch are closed as the poles come first into register, the magnetizing windings 7 will receive a current pulse which, assuming the windings are connected in the right sense, tends to demagnetize the four stator cores. This means that, as the stator and rotor poles separate, the reverse attraction by the magnets is eliminated. Indeed, if the demagnetizing current pulses supplied to the windings 4 are strong enough, the stator poles can reverse polarity and that results in a repulsion giving forward drive to the separating rotor poles.
The net result of this action is that the rotor will continue rotating until it passes the dead centre angular position which allows the rotor to be attracted in the forward direction by the stator poles 90°(Degree) forward of those acting originally.
The commutating switch 8 needs only to be closed for a limited period of angular travel following the top dead centre in-register position of the stator and rotor poles. The power supplied through that switch by those pulses will cause the rotor to continue rotating and high speeds will be achieved as the machine develops its full motor function.
Tests on such a machine have shown that more mechanical power can be delivered than is supplied electrically by the source powering the action through the commutating switch. The reason for this is that, whereas the energy in the air gap between rotor and stator poles which is tapped mechanically as the poles come into register is provided by the intrinsic power of the ferromagnet, a demagnetizing winding on the part of the core system coupled across that air gap needs very little power to eliminate the mechanical force acting across that air gap. Imagine such a winding on the bridging member shown in Fig. 2. The action of current in that winding, which sits astride the 'yawing' flux in that bridging member well removed from the source action of the magnetizing windings 1, is placed to be extremely effective in resisting the magnetizing influence communicated from a distance. Hence very little power is needed to overcome the magnetic coupling transmitted across the air gap.
Although the mutual inductance between two spaced-apart magnetizing windings has a reciprocal action, regardless of which winding is primary and which is secondary, the action in the particular machine situation being described involves the 'solenoidal' contribution represented by the 'yawing' ferromagnetic flux action. The latter is not reciprocal inasmuch as the flux 'yaw' depends on the geometry of the system. A magnetizing winding directing flux directly across an air gap has a different influence on the action in the ferromagnetic core from one directing flux lateral to the air gap and there is no reciprocity in this action.
In any event, the facts of experiment do reveal that, owing to a significant discrepancy in such mutual interaction, more mechanical power is fed into the rotor than is supplied as input from the electrical source.
This has been further demonstrated by using the two stator windings 9 to respond in a generator sense to the passage of the rotor poles. An electrical pulse is induced in each winding by the passsage of a rotor pole and this is powered by the inertia of the rotor disc 5. By connecting the power so generated to charge the capacitor 11 the d. c. power supply can be augmented to enhance the efficiency even further. Indeed, the machine is able to demonstrate the excess power delivery from the ferromagnetic system by virtue of electrical power generation charging a battery at a greater rate than a supply battery is discharged.
This invention is concerned with a practical embodiment of the motor-generator principles just described and aims, in its preferred aspect, to provide a robust and reliable machine in which the tooth stresses in the rotor poles, which are fluctuating stresses communicating high reluctance drive torque, are not absorbed by a ceramic permanent magnet liable to rupture owing to its brittle composition.
Another object is to provide a structure which can be dismantled and reassembled easily to replace the permanent magnets, but an even more important object is that of minimizing the stray leakage flux oscillations from the powerful permanent magnets. Their rotation in the device depicted in Fig. 4 would cause excessive eddy-current induction in nearby metal, including that of the machine itself, and such effects are minimized if the flux changes are confined to paths through steel laminations and if the source flux from the magnets has a symmetry or near symmetry about the axis of rotation.
Thus, the ideal design with this in mind is one where the permanent magnet is a hollow cylinder located on a non-magnetic rotor shaft, but, though that structure is within the scope of this invention, the machine described will utilize several separate permanent magnets approximating, in function, such a cylindrical configuration.
Referring to Fig. 4, it will further be noted that the magnetic flux emerging from the north poles will have to find its way along leakage paths through air to re-enter the south poles. For periods in each cycle of machine operation the flux will be attracted through the stator cores, but the passage through air is essential and so the power of the magnets is not used to full advantage and there are those unwanted eddy-current effects.
To overcome this problem the invention provides for two separate rotor sections and the stator poles become bridging members, which with optimum design, allow the flux from the magnets to find a route around a magnetic circuit with minimal leakage through air as the flux is directed through one or other pairs of air gaps where the torque action is developed.
Reference is now made to Fig. 5 and the sequence of rotor positions shown. Note that the stator pole width can be significantly smaller that that of the rotor poles. Indeed, for operation using the principles of this invention, it is advantageous for the stator to have a much smaller pole width so as to concentrate the effective pole region. A stator pole width of half that of the rotor is appropriate but it may be even smaller and this has the secondary advantage of requiring smaller magnetizing windings and so saving on the loss associated with the current circuit.
The stator has eight pole pieces formed as bridging members 12, more clearly represented in Fig. 7, which shows a sectional side view through two rotor sections 13 axially spaced on a rotor shaft 14. There are four permanent magnets 15 positioned between these rotor sections and located in apertures 16 in a disc 17 of a non-magnetic substance of high tensile strength, the latter being shown in Fig. 6. The rotor sections are formed from disc laminations of electrical steel which has seven large teeth, the salient poles. Magnetizing windings 18 mounted on the bridging members 12 constitute the system governing the action of the motor-generator being described.
The control circuitry is not described as design of such circuitry involves ordinary skill possessed by those involved in the electrical engineering art.
It suffices, therefore, to describe the merits of the structural design configuration of the core elements of the machine. These concern principally the magnetic action and, as can be imagined from Fig. 7, the magnetic flux from the magnets enters the rotor laminations by traversing the planar faces of the laminations and being deflected into the plane of the laminations to pass through one or other of the stator pole bridging members, returning by a similar route through the other rotor.
By using eight stator poles and seven rotor poles, the latter having a pole width equal to half the pole pitch in an angular sense, it will be seen from Fig. 5, that there is always a flux passage across the small air gap between stator and rotor poles. However, as one pole combination is in-register the diametrically-opposed pole combinations are out-of-register.
As described by reference to Fig. 4 the operation of the machine involves allowing the magnet to pull stator and rotor poles into register and then, as they separate, pulsing the winding on the relevant stator member to demagnetize that member. In the Fig. 4 system, all the stator magnetizing windings were pulsed together, which is not an optimum way in which to drive a multi-pole machine.
In the machine having the pole structure with one less rotor pole than stator poles (or an equivalent design in which there is one less stator pole than rotor poles) this pulsing action can be distributed in its demand on the power supply, and though this makes the commutation switch cicuit more expensive the resulting benefit outweighs that cost.
However, there is a feature of this invention by which that problem 15 can be alleviated if not eliminated.
Suppose that the rotor has the position shown in Fig. 5(a) with the rotor pole denoted R1 midway between stator poles S1 and S2 imagine that this is attracted towards the in-register position with stator pole S2. Upon reaching that in-register position, as shown in Fig. 5 (c), suppose that the magnetizing winding of stator pole S2 is excited by a current pulse which is sustained until the rotor reaches the Fig. 5(e) position. The combination of these two actions will have imparted a forward drive impulse powered by the permanent magnet in the rotor structure and the current pulse which suppresses braking action will have drawn a smaller amount of energy from the electrical power source that supplies it. This is the same process as was described by reference to Fig. 4.
However, now consider the events occurring in the rotor action diametrically opposite that just described. In the Fig 5(a) position rotor pole R4 has come fully into register with stator pole S5 and so stator pole S5 is ready to be demagnetized. However, the magnetic coupling between the rotor and stator poles is then at its strongest. Note, however, that in that Fig. 5(a) position R5 is beginning its separation from stator pole S6and the magnetizing winding of stator pole S6 must then begin draw power to initiate demagnetization. During that following period of pole separation the power from the magnet is pulling R1 and S2 together with much more action than is needed to generate that current pulse needed to demagnetize S6. It follows, therefore, that, based on the research findings of the regenerative excitation in the test system of Fig. 4, the series connection of the magnetizing windings on stators S2 and S6 will, without needing any commutative switching, provide the regenerative power needed for machine operation.
The complementary action of the two magnetizing windings during the pole closure and pole separation allows the construction of a machine which, given that the zero-point vacuum energy powering the ferromagnet is feeding input power, will run on that source of energy and thereby cool the sustaining field system.
There are various design options in implementing what has just been proposed. Much depends upon the intended use of the machine. If it is intended to deliver mechanical power output the regenerative electrical power action can all be used to power the demagnetization with any surplus contributing to a stronger drive torque by reversing the polarity of the stator poles during pole separation.
If the object is to generate electricity by operating in generator mode then one could design a machine having additional windings on the stator for delivering electrical power output. However, it seems preferable to regard the machine as a motor and maximize its efficiency in that capacity whilst using a mechanical coupling to an alternator of conventional design for the electrical power generation function. In the latter case it would still seem preferable to use the self-excitation feature already described to reduce commutation switching problems.
The question of providing for machine start-up can be addressed by using a separate starter motor powered from an external supply or by providing for current pulsing limited to, say, two stator poles. Thus, for example, with the eight stator pole configuration, the cross-connected magnetizing windings could be limited to three stator pairs, with two stator magnetizing windings left free for connection to a pulsed external supply source.
If the latter feature were not required, then the stator magnetizing windings would all be connected in pairs on a truly diametrically opposite basis. Thus Fig. 8 shows a rotor-stator configuration having six stator poles interacting with seven rotor poles and stator magnetizing windings linked together in pairs.
The invention, therefore, offers a wide range of implementation possibilities, which, in the light of this disclosure will become obvious to persons skilled in the electrical engineering art, all based, however, on the essential but simple principle that a rotor has a set of poles of common polarity which are attracted into register with a set of stator poles that are suppressed or reversed in polarity magnetically during pole separation. The invention, however, also offers the important feature of minimizing commutation and providing further for a magnetic flux closure that minimizes the leakage flux and fluctuations of leakage flux and so contributes to efficiency and high torque performance as well as durability and reliability of a machine incorporating the invention.
It is noted that although a machine has been described which uses two rotor sections it is possible to build a composite version of the machine having several rotor sections. In the eventuality that the invention finds use in very large motor-generator machines the problem of providing very large magnets can be overcome by a design in which numerous small magnets are assembled. The structural concept described by reference to Fig. 6 in providing locating apertures to house the magnets makes this proposal highly feasible. Furthermore, it is possible to replace the magnets by a steel cylinder and provide a solenoid as part of the stator structure and located between the rotor sections. This would set up an axial magnetic field magnetizing the steel cylinder and so polarizing the rotor. However, the power supplied to that solenoid would detract from the power generated and so such a machine would not be as effective as the use of permanent magnets such as are now available. Nevertheless, should one see significant progress in the development of warm superconductor materials, it may become feasible to harness the self-generating motor-generator features of the invention, with its selfcooling properties, by operating the device in an enclosure at low temperatures and replacing the magnets by a superconductive statorsupported solenoid.
Claims
(1) An electrodynamic motor-generator machine comprising a stator configured to provide a set of stator poles, a corresponding set of magnetizing windings mounted on the stator pole set, a rotor having two sections each of which has a set of salient pole pieces, the rotor sections being axially spaced along the axis of rotation of the rotor, rotor magnetization means disposed between the two rotor sections arranged to produce a unidirectional magnetic field which magnetically polarizes the rotor poles, whereby the pole faces of one rotor section all have a north polarity and the pole faces of the other rotor section all have a south polarity and electric circuit connections between an electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings arranged to regulate the operation of the machine by admitting current pulses for a duration determined according to the angular position of the rotor, which pulses have a direction tending to oppose the polarization induced in the stator by the rotor polarization as stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby the action of the rotor magnetization means provides a reluctance motor drive force to bring stator and rotor poles into register and the action of the stator magnetization windings opposes the counterpart reluctance braking effect as the poles separate.
(2) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the circuit connecting the electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings is designed to deliver current pulses which are of sufficient strength and duration to provide demagnetization of the stator poles as the stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position.
(3) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the circuit connecting the electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings is designed to deliver current pulses which are of sufficient strength and duration to provide a reversal of magnetic flux direction in the stator poles as the stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby to draw on power supplied from the electric current source to provide additional forward drive torque.
(4) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the electric current source connected to a stator magnetizing winding of a first stator pole comprises, at least partially, the electrical pulses induced in the stator magnetizing winding of a different second stator pole, the stator pole set configuration in relation to the rotor pole set configuration being such that the first stator pole is coming into register with a rotor pole as the second stator pole separates from its in-register position with a rotor pole.
(5) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the number of poles in a set of stator poles is different from the number of rotor poles in each rotor section.
(6) A motor-generator according to claim I, wherein the stator configuration provides pole pieces which are common to both rotor sections in the sense that when stator and rotor poles are in-register the stator pole pieces constitute bridging members for magnetic flux closure in a magnetic circuit including that of the rotor magnetization means disposed between the two rotor sections.
(7) A motor-generator according to claim 6, wherein the number of poles in a set of stator poles and the number of rotor poles in each section do not share a common integer factor and the number of rotor poles in one rotor section is the same as that in the other rotor section.
(8) A motor-generator according to claim 7, wherein the number of poles in a stator set and the number of poles in a rotor section differs by one and the pole faces are of sufficient angular width to assure that the magnetic flux produced by the rotor magnetization means can find a circuital magnetic flux closure route through the bridging path of a stator pole and through corresponding rotor poles for any angular position of the rotor.
(9) A motor-generator according to claim 8, wherein each rotor section comprises seven poles.
(10) A motor-generator according to claim 7, wherein there are N rotor poles in each rotor section and each has an angular width that is 180/N degree of angle.
(11) A motor-generator according to claim 7, wherein the stator pole faces have an angular width that is no greater than half the angular width of a rotor pole.
(12) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the rotor sections comprise circular steel laminations in which the rotor poles are formed as large teeth at the perimeter, and the rotor magnetization means comprise a magnetic core structure the end faces of which abut two assemblies of 20 such laminations forming the two rotor sections.
(13) A motor-generator according to claim 1 in which the rotor magnetization means comprises at least one permanent magnet located with its polarization axis parallel with the rotor axis.
(14) A motor-generator according to claim 13, wherein an apertured metal disc that is of a non-magnetizable substance is mounted on a rotor shaft and positioned intermediate the two rotor sections and each aperture provides location for a permanent magnet, whereby the centrifugal forces acting on the permanent magnet as the rotor rotates are absorbed by the stresses set up in the disc.
(15) A motor-generator according to claim 1, having a rotor mounted on a shaft that is of a non-magnetizable substance, whereby to minimize 5 magnetic leakage from the rotor magnetizing means.
(16) An electrodynamic motor-generator machine comprising a stator configured to provide a set of stator poles, a corresponding set of magnetizing windings mounted on the stator pole set, a rotor having two sections each of which has a set of salient pole pieces, the rotor sections being axially spaced along the axis of rotation of the rotor, rotor magnetization means incorporated in the rotor structure and arranged to polarize the rotor poles, whereby the pole faces of one rotor section all have a north polarity and the pole faces of the other rotor section all have a south polarity and electric circuit connections between an electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings arranged to regulate the operation of the machine by admitting current pulses for a duration determined according to the angular position of the rotor, which pulses have a direction tending to oppose the polarization induced in the stator by the rotor polarization as stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby the action of the rotor magnetization means provides a reluctance motor drive force to bring stator and rotor poles into register and the action of the stator magnetization windings opposes the counterpart reluctance braking effect as the poles separate.
(17) A motor- generator according to claim 16, wherein the electric current source connected to a stator magnetizing winding of a first stator pole comprises, at least partially, the electrical pulses induced in the stator magnetizing winding of a different second stator pole, the stator pole set configuration in relation to the rotor pole set configuration being such that the first stator pole is coming into register with a rotor pole as the second stator pole separates from its in-register position with a rotor pole.
Amendments to the Claims:
(1) An electrodynamic motor-generator machine comprising a stator configured to provide a set of stator poles, a corresponding set of magnetizing windings mounted on the stator pole set, a rotor having two sections each of which has a set of salient pole pieces, the rotor sections being axially spaced along the axis of rotation of the rotor, rotor magnetization means disposed between the two rotor sections arranged to produce a unidirectional magnetic field which magnetically polarizes the rotor poles, whereby the pole faces of one rotor section all have a north polarity and the pole faces of the other rotor section all have a south polarity and electric circuit connections between an electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings arranged to regulate the operation of the machine by admitting current pulses for a duration determined according to the angular position of the rotor, which pulses have a direction tending to oppose the polarization induced in the stator by the rotor polarization as stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position, whereby the action of the rotor magnetization means provides a reluctance motor drive force to bring stator and rotor poles into register and the action of the stator magnetization windings opposes the counterpart reluctance braking effect as the poles separate, the machine being characterized in that the stator comprises separate ferromagnetic bridging members mounted parallel with the rotor axis, the ends of which constitute stator poles and the core sect ions of which provide cross-section disposed antiparallel with the unidirectional magnetic field polarization axis of the rotor magnetizing means.
(2) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the circuit connecting the electric current source and the stator magnetizing windinga is designed to deliver current pulses which are of sufficient strength and duration to provide demagnetization of the stator poles as the stator and rotor poles separate from an in-register position.
(3) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the circuit connecting the electric current source and the stator magnetizing windings is designed to deliver current pulses which are of sufficient strength and duration to provide a reversal of magnetic flux direction in the stator poles as the stator and rotor poles separate from an in- register position, whereby to draw on power supplied from the electric current source to provide additional forward drive torque.
(4) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the electric current source connected to a stator magnetizing winding of a first stator pole comprises, at least partially, the electrical pulses induced in the stator magnetizing winding of a different second etator pole, the stator pole set configuration in relation to the rotor pole set configuration being such that the first stator pole is coming into register with a rotor pole as the second stator pole separates from its in-register position with a rotor pole.
(5) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the number of poles in a set of atator poles is different from the number of rotor poles in each rotor section.
(6) A motor-generator according to claim 1, wherein the stator configuration provides pole pieces which are common to both rotor sections in the sense that when stator and rotor poles are in-register the stator pole pieces constitute bridging members for magnetic flux closure in a magnetic circuit including that of the rotor magnetization means disposed between the two rotor sections.
(7) A motor-generator according to claim 6, wherein the number of poles in a set of stator poles and the number of rotor poles in each section do not share a common integer factor and the number of rotor poles in one rotor section is the same as that in the other rotor section.
Categories of documents:
Search Examiner: J. COCKITTX: Document indicating lack of novelty or of inventive step.
A: Document indicating technological background and/or state of the art.Category Identity of document and relevant passages Relevant to claim(s):X GB 0547668 A (HITCHCOCK) see page 6 lines 54 to 71; Figures 6, 7 1-3, 6,
12-14, 16 at least
X US 4972112 A (KIM) see whole document 1-3 at least
A US 4873463 A (JONES)
Over 5 years ago I made a reference in a chapter of my book 'The Revelation of the Century' in relation to claims on "over 100% efficiency". In this book, which is still being distributed worldwide by Nexus Magazine, Publisher of Queensland, Australia, reference is made to what is erroneously termed "zero point" or "beyond unity". On page 14, second to last paragraph, I quoted:In support of my reference, I have now expanded upon this matter in this new Second Edition 2001. Now I am going to discuss this subject in more depth, and my revelations here will no doubt shatter the minds of many electrical engineers and scientists worldwide, because they have got it all wrong!
I do not subscribe to the definition of 'beyond unity'. There simply cannot be any such state, as the totality of the Universe is 'Unity'.To start with, in orthodox teachings, we have the word "efficiency" used extensively in relation to electrical machines and devices, etc. So too, we now have the definition of 'over 100% efficiency' bandied around extensively. Now, this term 'efficiency', insofar as orthodox teachings are concerned, applies only to calculations to 100% and beyond. Now that most of the scientific world are now beginning to accept the possibility of 'over 100% efficiency', this, in turn, has now also spilled over into using the terms of 'unity', 'beyond unity', 'negative energy', 'zero point', etc. These terms do not necessarily apply because here, in fact, is just where reality comes into the act. For instance, if we have a machine or device displaying an input of 100 watts and an output of 500 watts, this equals 500%. This is so, but it only indicates the degree of performance calculated at the end of the day. The shattering truth of the matter is that the device is not necessarily operating in the realm of 'unity', let alone over unity, zero point, negative time, etc. However, a machine or device that "measures" over 100% and displays energy "growth" effects, with "time", which are "additive" and "accumulative", then this is "not" conventional science, but science of another dimension - this is UNITY! So, therefore, a machine or device which does not display the aforegoing effects, is not a unity or over unity device, as is too often claimed. This kind of evidence outlined above is, in my knowledge of science, the "only" method by which the violation of the Law of Conservation can be proven. Ever expanding energy, akin to the now proven and accepted evidence of the Expansion of the Universe.
The permanent magnet rotor of the Adams Machine is of the only type of its kind in the world and, due to its unusual materials and their geometric placements, the rotor of the Adams Machine remains cool and, at most, rises only three to five degrees Celsius above ambient under full load! The rare earth magnets of the rotor are therefore protected from destruction due to excessive heat which would be inevitable in a very short period of time in a, for instance, large version of the Faraday Machine, and others I could mention. Faraday was brilliant in that he well knew the disadvantages and problems to be faced in attempting to put the discovery of this puny quantity of energy to work, by simply discarding it as a useless oddity, where it should have remained. Time has proven that hundreds of people worldwide have attempted to construct a viable Faraday machine and have all failed to prove excess energy presence, except for Tewari and Inomatu, who still have the problem of harnessing the high current efficiently without the use of lethal Mercury and the dispersement of excessive heat manifesting within the machine rotor.
It is my confirmed opinion that we are now into a major revolution in science and technology. New systems are almost a daily occurrence, major breakthroughs are coming on stream at a very fast pace and on a regular basis. Such are some of the breakthroughs that their effects on our civilisation will defy description. Superluminal energy production that is clean, economical and safer is now here.
The sooner people learn that the genius of man is, in reality, the genius of our Creator and it is unlimited, the better it will be for mankind. To believe otherwise is to state that our Creator's genius is limited. Our Creator's genius is not limited - it is the false teachings of physics bandied out by the mind of man in our Universities and Colleges alike that is limited. The laws of physics, as they stand today, are little but convenient assumptions ("if it works, leave it alone" kind of thinking), where true science (progressive science) abides by the Laws of Nature. This is why we humans are fully capable of applying the Laws of Nature to physics in our new dimension of thought, but still appear reluctant to deprogram when it comes to the orthodox and almost religious dogmas of past and sacrosanct principles of man-made scientific notions. Our Universe is negentropically organised and is proceeding transfinitely from disorder to order. It was until recent times it was accepted wisdom that the sun revolved around the earth and your life depended upon believing it!
Nexus Magazine (August-September 1993)The Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator --- Update
Robert Adams of New Zealand Outlines Magnetic Polarity Reversal & His Discoveries
As the inventor of the `Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator', I write this treatise with a view to keeping it uncluttered from unnecessary thcories and mathematics, so that all who read this article, whether they be enthusiasts, engineers or scientists, are able to follow the text, together with its drawings, describing the sequences in various stages of operation of the `Adams Advanced PEMG'.
My various discoveries cover over twenty-five years in the fields of electrical rotary machines, with a total of over sixty years involvement in communications, broacasting and electrical engineering.
It is my desire that as many free energy enthusiasts as possible get into the act of building my original machine whilst, at the same time, conducting their own research. Several people in different countries have already succeeded in building the machine in its original form, as has been outlined in the "Adams Manual", with beyond-unity results. After obtaining satisfying results from the original version, one would then be better equipped to handle the more stringent requirements of the 'Advanced', or 'Mark II' version. A lot of material in this treatise pertains to this 'Mark II' version, i.e., the 'Adams Advanced Motor Generator'.
Losses In Electrical Machines
Losses in conventional electrical machines are too high and are due to magnetic drag, eddy currents and hysterisis, and consequent high operating temperatures.
It was with the above problerms in mind that I was prompted to fid a way of overcoming the aforementioned losses, the result of which evolved in a machine of beyond-unity capabilities.As the `Adanis Motor' is a pulsed direct-current device, there is no change in polarity of the external source; therefore there are no eddy current losses, and hysterisis loss in the motor is minuscule; with new matials becoming available for stators, the small loss incurred would disapear. It matters little, however, as the machine efficiency is such that such a minuscule loss is negligible.
With reference to magnetic drag, this too is virtually non-existent, due to the unique design of the machine. A rotor pole, upon leaving the attraction area of the stator, is at a precise geometrical point - and is suddenly repulsed, thus overcoming any possibility of magnetic drag taking place.
Having outlined the above, I will now explain something regarding magnetic drag that won't be found in classical teachings or texts: a rotor, once in motion, is mutually attracted to any stator in its path. On leaving the stator area, however, the stator causes a drag-back effect - classical teachings do tell you that much. What classical teaching does not tell you is that the energy in the initial attraction equals exactly that which causes the drag upon leaving the stator area. This is where classical teaching is found wanting. The original attraction and secondary attraction exactly cancel one another out. Magnetic drag, therefore, does not exist in the straight motor version of the `Adams Motor' invention. The machine is pulsed before the trailing edge of the rotor magnet can be affected. Should the timing be a littie out, the effect would be minuscule.
Having discussed the aforementioned factors, there is littie to explain regarding the very low operating temperature of the `Adams Motor', as a result of which it does not require the use of a cooling fan with its own efficiency loss to counter.
It has been noted in New Energy News under the title "High Current Brushes", on making use of silver and platinum for commutator and points: this news is not news to me as, during my research in 1976,1 used these materials myself for the above purpose. It appears, however, from this article submitted to New Energy News that the method for their use, being researched, has good prospects. I, for one, look forward to learning of the progress in this direction.
In 1976 I learnt of the high losses of my commutator system and first used silver for the star disc and platinum for the points with considerable success, and having since used photo and magnetic switching with remarkable success. Having, of course, kept my research and experimentation to myself over the past two decades for reasons associatetl in the main with the establishment, and latterly with interational patent law, I was forced to withhold all my machine's secrets up until my recent decision to publish certain aspects of my work earlier this year.
Recent Discovery by the Author
One would expect magnetic polarity reversal to be instantaneous in a rotary machine between rotor magnet and stator. However, this is not so. I have recently discovered that the reversal is exponential in tnansition from one polarity to another. When this occurs, the magnetic radiation of the rotor pole/s doubles and, with no external power aIplied, there is no magnetism in the stator pole - so it becomes patently logical that the extra energy can only be from the ether (negative-time-nergy).
Engineering Into Negative Time & Negative Energy
In the realms of engineering negative energy and negative time, I have anticipated there would be a new world of discoveries at hand and answers to be found to certain phenomna taking place, to which we have all previously been unaccustomed. This anticipation has manifested itself all too soon as, since my first successfull recent attempts at engineering anti-gravity have proven, some interesting phenomena have become revealed, one of which is the process of magnetic polarity reversal, or conversion.
In an endeavour to discover what actually takes place during this 'conversion' of magnetic polarity, I used a magnetic polarity indicator and compass, but both proved worthless, as they simply hunted back and forth due to the pulses of magnetic fields from the machine being in motion.
Subsequent to this attempt, I had meanwhile mude an important discovery concerning magnetic polarity reversal, in that it was not necessary that the machihe he in motion or apply any external energy in oreder for it to bring about the magnetic polarity reversal. From this discovery, I became confident that I further discovered what actually takes place in this region in relation to the reversal phenomenon. In order to implement a test on this, I determined that a slow movement of the rotor by hand would indicate, on the instruments, what would he taking place. This exercise did indeed prove to be of substance, and I will now, here, graphically portray the results.
To deliver power, however, from the negative energy/negative time region, the machine must be in motion and, preferably, operating at certain harmonic speeds. The accompanying drawings give a physical description of the magnetic actions taking place as the rotor magnet reaches the stator and commenes to traverse though the negative energy/negative time region.
In a 180 degree configuration, with two stator poles, the same actions take place simultaneously in reverse magnetic polarity order (as Drawing TD-GOOl, Figure 2, pointers A and B indicate).
Actions Taking Place in the Adams Advanced (Mark II) Motor Generator(1) A rotor south pole, upon approaching an open cincuit stator, is mutually attracted to it, as depicted by Drawing TD-G004, Figure A. [ These figures are missing ]
(2) When the leading edge of a south pole reaches the edge of a stator (Figure B), it appears, as it begins to move inwards, that the south polarity of the rotor pole is being exponentially reversed to north. In addition, the stator now becomes a temponary magnet, also exponentially becorning a north pole (Figure C). Meanwhile, the rotor magnet is still being attracted up to point zero of the stator (Figure D) and, as the leading edge of the rotor moves from point zero of the stator second-half region (Figure E), it appears that the north polarity strength is now increasing exponentially in this region and, on becoming parallel, i.e. reaching each other face-to-face (Figure F), the magetic polarity reversal is then complete, and both magnet and stator poles are at north polarity. lt is in this region now that the state of and-gravity and negative time exists, with two magnets of like poles attracting each other and creating a gravitational repulsive force at the completion of the magnetic polarity reversal cycle.
There is a specific point of `x' from the stator centre where the machine is pulsed (refer Drawing TD-G001, Figure 1, A & B, pulse angle). Fine tuning the timing at this geometrical point, the machine passes into a state of electromotive resonance where input power drops dramatically and shaft power increases in the negative time and negative energy region.
In all, the machine benefits from four different force actions per revolution and paying a minuscule toll fee for only one.
Firstly, as depicted by Figure A of Drawing TD-G004, the rotor magnet is mutually attracted to the stator (gets away without paying for that - explained elsewhere - refer paragraph 4 in section headed 'Losses in Electrical Machines'). Secondly, the attraction of the gravitational repulsion forces in the anti- gravity area (as illustrated in Drawing TD-G001, Figure 2, at arrows A & B). Thirdly, from the repulsion pulse of the stator at point `x' (refer to pulse angle of Drawing TD-G001, Figure 1).
Fourthly, the rotor is given a further pulse from the collapsing field (a few degrees from potra `x' in Figure 1).
For maximum possible results from the `Adams Advanced (Mark II) Motor', it is necessary to apply harmonic/resonance equations for the calculation of all parameters including speeds and frequency. With the foregoing parameters met, it is recommended to engage magnetic or photo switching with its low loss, high efficiency properties. Drawing TD-G002, on the left, illustrates a positive `untuned state' and, on the right of the same drawing, a `tuned resonant state', together with a graph showing relative polarity change with component dimension changes. The area within the lower circle of the system indicates both poles are at north polarity (note the two curved arrows at each side of the magnet pole which depict the change that is/has taken place in the negative-time area).
It is possible to engineer the `Adams Advanced (Mark II) PEMG' in such a way that a machine of any desired efficiency may be constructed from 100% up to four figures and beyond.
The term `efficiency' now becomes a matter to be addressed, which I have done in the section headed `Free-Energy Devices and the Term `Efficiency' and its Connotations'.
Permanent Magnets & Work
Permanent magnets do not and can not `do work' --- as claimed by certain people.
It is the ether/gravity forces which cause immense attraction and/or repulsion to take place between a permanent magnet and other magnetic material. It is these ether forces that, combining with the captive permanent magnet fields, harness the energy of gravity ether forces, so often erroneously referred to as `work' `done by magnets' (refer to notes on Nikola Tesla at the end of this section).
The magnets in this situation are simply acting `as a gate', making way to the ether for the collection/release of gravitational/ether energy. The pemanent magnet is a component in the system, operating as a `gating device', as explained elsewhere in my writing --- the magnet does not generate or create power (refer to Drawing TD-G005).
If magnets were doing `work', they would heat up! The contrary takes place in negative-time systems during operation: rotor magnets drop in temperature below ambient in the above-described enviromnent. Subtracting the drop in temperature of the rotor magnets from any small rise (if any) in stator temperature, due to minuscule hysterisis, would cancel the difference. The deeper the condition of resonance in the system, the lower the temperature of the magnets and stator windings.
When magnets and stators are engineered into negative time, the rotor, upon eclipsing face-to-face with the stator poles, causes a state of negative energy/negative time in that area at that moment in time. Aimost simultaneously there is, in addition, the vector zero stress due to the resonantly-tuned wave trains of the stator pole generated voltage with that of the pulse voltage wave, resulting in a near mirror image.
The negative time/negative energy area between rotor magnet and stator independently causes an increase of 100% magnetic radiation every time a pole of the rotor passes a stator.In this negative time, gravitational force is reversed; so in negative time, gravity becomes a repulsion force, not an attraction force.
Negative Time/Negative Energy Radiation Pattern ~
Irrespective of a magnet's gauss rating in a negative time/negative energy device, the area of magnetic radiation can be seen to double when a specific magnet and stator are engineered into `negative time'. This radiation originates at toe centre of the negative time region between the magnet and the stator, and spreads out radially and diminishes in strength as the square of the distance.
The enormous increase in radiation into space, and negative energy developed, is not generated by the magnet, as a lot of people would have you believe. Its source is (again) due to the magnet forming a gate and tapping gravitational energy with the result of gravitational repulsion, as explalned in `Engineering into Negative Time and Negative Energy'.
The area of radiation so covered by a negative time/negative energy device measures always an exact electromagnetic light gravity harmonic distance figure taken from point of origin.
These above statements are not theoretical but are indeed discoveries and results of actual tests and measurements undertaken in the laboratory by myself.
Nikola Tesla
While going through my notes and excerpts on Nikola TeSla's findings on Sunday 20 June 1993, I discovered a prepared statement of Tesla's 10 July 1937 work and another from the New York Herald Tribune dated 11 September 1932.
Tesla's statement below, dated 10 July 1937, vindicates completely my statement that magnets do not and can not `do work'. Tesla's statement is:
"There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment. It applies rigorously to molecules and atoms as well as the largest heavenly bodies and to all matter in the universe in any phase of its existence from its very formation to its ultimate disintegralion."
"A few words will be sufficient in support of this contention. The kinetic and potential energy of a body is the result of motion and determined by the product of its mass and the square of velocity. Let the mass be reduced, the energy is diminished in the same proporlion. If it be reduced to zero, the energy is likewise zero for any finite velocity. In other words, it is absolutely impossible to convert mass into energy. It would be different if there were forces in nature capable of imparting to a mass infinite velocity. Then the product of zero mass with the square of infinite velocity would represent infinite energy. But we know that there are no such forces and the idea that mass is convertible into energy is rank nonsense."
Nikola Tesla's statement of 11 September 1932, New York Herald Tribune is:
"The assumption of the Maxwellian ether was thought necessary to explain the propagation of light by transverse vibrations, which can only occur in a solid. So fascinating was this theory that even at present it has many supporters, despite the manifest impossibility of a medium, perfectly mobile and tenuous to a degree inconceivable, and yet extremely rigid, like steel. As a result, some illusionary ideas have been formed and various phenomena erroneously interpreted. The so-called Hertz waves are still considered a reality, proving that light is electrical in its nature, and also that the ether is capable of transmitting transverse vibrations of frequencies however low. This view has become untenable, since I showed that the universal medium is a gaseous body in which only longitudinal pulses can be propagated, involving alternating compressions and expansions similar to those produced by sound waves in the air. Thus, a wireless transmitter does not emit Hertz waves, which are a myth, but sound waves in the ether, behaving in every rescect like those in the air, except that, owing to the great elastic force and extremely small density of the medium, their speed is that of light."
Although personal friends, Tesla and Einstein did not always agree with each other on certain points. However what Teala is saying here is that though 'E=Mc2', you can't simply choose a lump of mass such as a permanent magnet, place it in a system and extract energy from it, As aforesaid, in Tesla's own words, "the idea that mass is convertible into energy is rank nonsese."
Free Energy Devices & the Term 'Efficiency' & Its Connotations
The term `efficiency' or `efficiency losses' relative to an external souree, loses all substance or meaning when considering devices capable or well beyond unity. The term is no longer a yardstick, so to speak' as it becomes a relic of establishment teachings and present-day so-called conservation of energy laws, which now require to he rewritten. We must, therefore, now have a negentropy law.
Losses, if indeed any exist in a beyond-unity device, would be minuscule and of no subsance, due to the output capacity of the device.
In my opinion, the most salient factor to look for in a device clalmed to operate beyond unity, is its operating temperature under full load. This factor tells all, without the initial necessity to carry out exhaustive test procedures.
The matter of temperature or beyond-unity devices brings to mind Tesla's electric car. It is stated in my notes that the machine becnes very hot during operation. This, or course, is to be expected, as the `free-energy section' of the machine is a separate entity to the car motor proper, and in the year 1931, when Tesla tested his "Pierce Arrow" car, conventional DC motors were notoriously inefficient-around the order of 35 percent, - and, incidentally, meanwhile, haven't improved that much. In addition, the confined space would have also been of no help, even with the assistance of a fan, which also had to be used according to his notes.
However, in contrast, my beyond-unity power device (`gravity generator') would be operating at least 2O to 40 degrees Centigrade below ambient. As the father of many discoveries and inventions pertaining to coils, transformers, pulsing systems and electric motors, on reflection it is unfortunate that Tesla hadn't figured out what could be done with his pulsing systems in relation to electric motors. Had he done so, be would not have required (according to Muller) powerfull magnets or a cooling fan.
It is my opinion, after many years' experience in the fire-energy research field, that a table of negative time/negative energy `rating' be formulated in relation to devices using permanent magnets in fire-energy applications. I am, at present, endeavouring to work out a system or magnetic radiation field strength measurement as a possible means or evaluating rotary devices that utilise permanent magnets. A system of this nature would distinguish `beyond- unity shoptalk' from `conventional shoptalk' and the term `efficiency' would remaln relegated to conventional devices. As the future `beyond-unity empire' will grow and mature, so conventionalism, along with its present terminology, will wither and die.
The universe is negentropically organised and is proceeding transfinitely from disorder to order. This is not the concept of energy taught today in college and university camppuses which persist in drumming in the long since foregone notions or Sir Isaac Newton and James Clerke Maxwell. We are, right this very moment, entering a new era of science, somewhat divorced from the trappings the establishment has been peddling for decades. We do not need to `wait upon' the establishant to catch up to us here, for if we did we would still be a century behind in a century's time. It is for the establishment teachings to latch onto us, which they will do - eventually - one day. In the meatime, new science will continue to force ahead regardless, until sheer embarrassment will force classical teaching out the door.
With anti-gravity / beyond-unity devices, we must now go on to reconstitute our scientific laws and introduce a few new ones. As aforementioned, one being a negentropy law within which we must now go on to agree to the use of a more appropriate term of measurement for devices using permanent magnets in free energy applications; and, as aforesaid, the term `rating' comes to mind. For the pupose of thist treatise l will now propose to use the term `beyond-unity rating' or `BUR' as an abbreviation, for the moment.
'Beyond-unity devices' `ratings' should, in my opinion, be according to an accepted table of values, ranging from what is, at present, termed `unity' upwards, and thereby dumping the term `efficiency' completely.
As there is no upper limit of negative energy other than `blastoff and/or `self-annihilation' upon reaching absolute resonance, then a suitable table of values, with a suitable baseline, would be a practical solution. As the term `unity' has been so indelibly engrained, then it would perhaps be suitable as a `base'.
No doubt the establishment will `perform' at my suggestions and/or recommendations on this - so be it. It would only take a small section of the researchers of new science amongst the `beyond-unity circle' to agree upon the adoption of a new system of measurement and/or definition and publish it internationally along with the appropriate table of figure ratings. This would then enable beyond-unity researchers and adherents alike a more realistic platform as a base to work from, whilst still allowing the term `efficiency' to apply to conventional below-unity aparatus.
This adoption of a new and separate system (or law) of the measurnent of over-unity devices will, at the outset, identify and distinguish the subject of beyond-unity from its conventional counterparts and allow beyond-unity and anti-gravity researchers to get on with the job without harrassment from the classical thinkers.
The Real McCoyIt is with great excitement, and appreciation to the inventor, that Nexus publishes the following information on the Permanent Magnet Electric D.C. Motor Generator of Robert Adams, a former Chairman of the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc., U.S.A., (N.Z. Section).
Afer having his invention suppressed for over 20 years, Mr Adams, at the age 72, has decided to share his design with the world regardless of the consequences. Mr. Adams' quest to bring "free" energy to the world has cost him dearly, as it has many other researchers who threaten to bring the "establishment" undone.
He has survived an attempt on his life by an individual affiliated with the New Zealand Secret Intelligence Service and the Central Intelligence Agency, direct suppression of his invention by former (and recently deceased) Prime Minister of New Zealand, Roben Muldoon, the giant British electronics company, Lucas Industries, as well as numerous other insurmountable difficulties that have been placed in his path. All because his invention worked. And not only that, it is so simple, any electronics manufacturer or skilled backyard-home-scientist could build one!
Inventors Beware!
In 1978 Mr. Adams discovered that inventors of machines or devices of high energy efficiency capability ("Free" Energy) are not only refused patents, but that in most cases, their inventions are classified under the "Military Use Clause", which is, of course, international. Inventors are prohibited from publishing details of their devices or promoting them in any manner if their invention is classified under this clause. In other words, their devices automatically become the sole property of the "establishment".
The fact that there is an established mechanism to suppress energy inventions of this nature has been a closely guarded secret for many years. Many inventors have made such claims, but the general public rentain oblivious to the fact that they are being deprived of clean and free energy by organisations that would rather make money and hold power over We public, than allow such technology to become widely available. Yet another example of the abuse of power. (No pun intended.)
"Free Energy"
This motor generator would be called a "Free Energy" machine by most individuals. It is, in fact, a device that converts the perpetual motion of sub-atomic particles, known in physics terminology as "particle spin", into conventional electric power. It is a widely accepted fact of physical law that sub-atomic particles are in a state of perpetual motion. Anybody who tells you that there is no such thing as perpetual motion is either ignorant or a liar.
As Robert Adams states, "Our universe is a sea of energy - free, clean energy. "It is all out there waiting for us to set sail upon it" Adams has built a number of permanent magnet electric D.C. motor generators based on the principle outlined in this article, some of which have demonstrated an electrical efficiency of 690% and a mechanical efficiency of 620%. The devices run at room temperature. Any device that doesn't could not be running at over 100% efficiency, as heat is the major result of hysteresis losses that are induced in any conventional electric motor or generator. Radiated heat is a sure-fire sign that a power generator is not running over unity, as all heat radiated by such a device is wasted energy.
I will remind readers once again at this point that Mr Adams is not a fly-by- night, propeller-head, whacko, techno-boffin. He is an electrical engineer with over 60 years experience in the field of electrical engineering, which has included designing and building equipment for use in power stations, broadcasting facilities, airport communications centres, etc. He is a former Chairman of the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc., U.S.A., (N.Z. Section), and his resume includes personal referees ranging from a former New Zealand Commissioner of Police, a former Chairman of Air New Zealand, (and several technical specialists from the airline), as well as an Ex- NASA scientist. Nexus would recommend to anybody interested in, or presently building a device of this nature, to try building a device based on Mr. Adams plans. His machines have demonstrated the ability to generate free energy, unlike most of the theoretical models that are promoted as over-unity devices.
General Description
The invention may be broadly said to be, an electric motor and/or generator comprising a rotor consisting of a number of radially arrayed permanently magnetised poles, and a stator consisting of a number of radially arrayed permanently magnetised poles, together with a number of wound poles. The rotor's permanently magnetised poles use ferite magnetic cores, and may comprise any even number of poles. The stator's wound poles employ steel or iron cores. The device is essentially a D.C. machine, but may be fed A.C. input with the use of a solid state convertor.
The Rotor uses a number of similar polarity permanent magnetic poles, i.e., all-South or all-North. A further set of wound poles are radially arrayed in the stator, and are arranged in such a manner as to be fed energy, that is excited by back E.M.F. energy, from the poles of the rotor.
Associated circuitry is provided to feed the energy back to the drive poles of the motor.
The resulting characteristics of this design is that once the rotor is moved from the position of equilibrium, each pole is attracted to, or repulsed by the stator poles, but at a precise geometrical point with respect to them, the input current to the drive coils ceases. As a result, the collapsing field current is in the opposite direction to the applied force, thus reversing the magnetic polarity of the stator coils. This forces the rotor poles away (reaction), which is the instantaneous response of a system to an applied force, and is manifested as the exertion of a force equal in magnitude, but opposite in direction to the applied force.
Pulsing the D.C. input current, overcomes losses generated in conventional motors. According to classical electrical engineering theory, efficiency is greater the more nearly equal the Back E.M.F. (electromotive force) is to the applied voltage, i.e. the lower the input current. Figure 6 shows that there is minimum 100% back E.M.F. relative to the supply source of input D.C. voltage (according to classical electrical theory), which virtually depicts a sine wave due to the effect of the collapsing field.
This effect also overcomes the electrodynamic torque problems associated with conventional motor designs. (As input power varies with the duty cycle pulse; i.e. the lower the input current, the lower the input current, and the lower the speed, the greater the torque.) At clipoff, the badk-EMF ceases, the collapsing field takes over, opposing the outgoing rotor magnet and thus increasing momentum. With this design force is applied twice during each D.C, pulse, with pulse-on, and with pulse-off.
The timing of the pulses are determined by the dimensions of the motor itself, i.e. the speed of rotation of the motor's central axle, the position of the rotor magnets in relation to the stator windings, as well as the distance that the rotor magnets travel when passing across the poles of the stator winding.
Fig. 1 to Fig. 4: How to calculate the D.C. pulse timing of the stator coils on the Permament Magnet Electric D.C. Motor Generator.
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 6: Graph showing oscilloscope trace of characteristic voltage across stator windings.
Construction & Operating NotesImportant Factors: Care must be exercised when assembling and wiring the drive windings to make sure that their polarities match the rotor magnet polarity. Common earthing must be avoided in order to preclude voltage and/or current loops. (If a number of drive windings do need to be commoned, use very low resistance conductors and employ a transmission type earthing system only.)
Stator (Drive) winding resistances are your choice. Robert Adams' machines were built varying from 0.03125 to 27 ohms per set, He has experimented with two, four, and eight pole machines. Efficiency increases with the number of wound poles in the stator.
Motor generators with a single, two, or three phase can be built to this design. A number of rotors may be ganged together on the same shaft in order to increase power output and does not require the use of any commutator, brushes or slip rings, all of which contribute to energy losses in ordinary motor generators.
Unlike conventional Series D.C, machines, this motor can be off-loaded, finds its own speed, and will run at that speed indefinitely. A conventional DC motor will run itself to destruction with off-loading. It requires no cooling, nor any overload protection, even if short circuited.
A number of highly qualified individuals have seen these devices running and producing energy at well above 100% efficiency. Let's hope that some of you can achieve similar results.
General Construction & Testing Procedures
An ideal drive winding pole can be very readily available by obtaining some B.P.O: 3000 type relays (ex Telecom). Simply remove present wmding, cut core in half, re-thread, assemble and fill with winding. This is a quick and cheap method of obtaining a very high quality non-retentive steel core. As aforementioned, winding resistances used by the inventor varied between 0.03125 to 27 ohms.
The above windings described are ample to drive prototypes even in a 180' application. You will find speeds up to 2500 rpm with only two of these windings 180' apart - no problem.
For A,C. Output Coil Windings and Core: Ideal cores can be built cheaply and quickly by dismantling a spare power or audio transformer and utilising the 'I' section laminations, obtain winding former to fit same and it is ready for winding. Turns and gauge will depend on what voltage and current you choose. Remember, at this stage, you should only be building a demonstration model, so to speak.
After a few changes, corrections and/or general modifications you will be ready to put a mechanical and/or electrical load on the machine. For an electrical load it is suggested you firstly wire up a bank of 6 - 12 LEDs. If everything is go, then switch over to torch lamps: Later on with a bigger machine - car lamps, or maybe household lamps and a mechanical load simultaneously.
For Efficiency Testing: Milliamp meters are useless for this machine - do not use for testing. Use only high quality digital true RMS meters, with input power, for high accuracy, use only a high quality electronic wattmeter: These instruments measure extremely accurately any wave-shape. A good twin-beam oscilloscope is a must: So too a high quality electronic temperature-measuring instrument with appropriate probe.
Drill dead centre of one or both cores, as per drawing. Probe be must be good fit. If, after one hour of running on load and temperatare is around 40 degrees, that will indicate things are most likely working correctly.
Don't forget your ambient in Australia will be considerably higher than ours. Read the inventor's rotary and solid state efficiency measurarnent data sheet.
Rotor-stator air gap is not critical, but the closer the better.
As stated elsewhere, the stator pole faces, if desired, may be reduced to 25% of the rotor pole face area, hence large drive windings and high drive current is not required.
With care to detail, correct mathematical calculations and high quality instrumentation correctly utilised, incredible results can be expected. Study data submitted shows those results have been attained on several machines.
Temperature of conventional machines internally reach boiling point after fifteen minutes running. Check the Adams Mctor Generator after running on full load for 48 hours, or after fifteen minutes if you prefer not to wait that long. You will be very pleasantly surprised - I refer to maximum loading conditions, not free running.
Mechanical Loading Test: A high quality strain measuring instrument must be used in the universal "pony brake' method of mechanical load testing.
RPM tests must also be obtained with a high quality tachometer and/or oscilloscope reading and use the universal equation to calculate mechanical machine efficiency.
Note: Very Important Factor --- As you increase duty cycle, current input will increase and efficiency will decrease. From random test sheet results I have chosen it is very clear what to expect upon increasing duty cycle.
Note: The Adams Motor Generator is so efficient, so simple and consequently it's construction is such that it surpasses overwhelmingly anything before it, thus lending itself admirably to mass production.
One of a number of unique features of the Adams Machine is the fact that the same rotor poles are utilised simultaneously for driving the machine and generating output energy.
Construction Equation - Adams Motor Generator (20-12-76): It was found, after considerable development work, that maximum electro- magnetic effect produced in the stalloy stacked generating pole windings occurred when the dimension of the mating end of the stacks were four times greater in area than the rotor magnet's pole area. Hence the overall design of the machine incorporates this derived ratio of one to four. (The Adams Equation, as applies only to the Adams Machine).
Feedback (20-12-1976): The feedback, produced by the output generating coil, produces a polarity reversal normally resulting in large eddy current losses in conventional machines, but, in the Adams Machine, it is hamessed to develop further additional torque to the magnetic rotor. The larger the output generating coils the greater the torque delivered to the rotor.
Power Factor (1-7-1976): There is no power factor loss because the Adams Machine runs in a condition of resonance. Therefore, the Power Factor Loss is zero.
I have for many years theorised the existence of four poles interacting in any magnet. There is little doubt that two poles dominate from what is observed, and taught, in classical texts.However, since my discovery of engineering magnets into forming four poles - and, in so doing, quadrupling the energy - surely some light has been shed on the theory of the existence of four poles. Bruce Cathie and I will investigate this further when time permits.
A rectangular or cube magnet, when engineered into the Adams technology, becomes a unit consisting of four twin poles, each face containing a north and a south pole, separated by a zero vortex in the centre of each of the four twin poles, and all displaying similar energies.
Ironically, but not unexpectedly, this super twin-pole magnet is a very valuable adjunct to further advancement of the Adams Motor technology. The energy found on the edges of each of the four faces is very high-25 per cent of the total energy of the full face.
The present lab magnets are approximately three-quarters-of-an-inch cube. The edge of any face will hold a five-kilogram steel or iron block in mid-air. When the full face of the magnet is attached to metal, a force of beyond 20 kg is required to remove it. In my presentation to the NEXUS Conference, I advised tests would be carried out this month to determine the strain required to remove the magnet.
The dice-sized magnet was attached to a steel plate on a ceiling rafter and, with the aid of a chain, a 15-kilogram block was first attached to it; then a 4.7-kg block added on with a nylon rope; then another 200-gram block was attached; then, a fourth 2W-gram block. The magnet still hanging fast, a 100-gram block was added; then...wait for it...CRASH to the floor. The magnet was still attached to its anchor on the roof-rafter!
A magnet, approximately three-quarters-of-an-inch cube, weighing only 60 grams, capable of holding a weight of beyond 20 kilograms in mid-air, 333.333 times its own weight? Will this at last have something of an effect on the closed ignorant minds of conventional science?
The way now must surely be clear that space/gravity energy via electromagnetic forces of permanent magnets is not impossible nor difficult to harness. The space/gravity energies are clean, non-exhaustible and free. The Adams technology has proved this and leaves no grounds for dispute.
Einstein's sacrosanct theories of relativity, and the laws of thermodynamics, are the most remarkable and inexplicable aberrations ever recorded in scientific history. These draconian false teachings have been instrumental in impeding tbe process of science towards free, clean energy.
Classical Theory & Adams Technology
The classical theory of magnetism from the textbooks attiibutes the phenomenon to the motion of electrons within the atoms of molecules. There is evidence that the orbital electrons in an atom not only revolve about the nucleus of the atom, but also each individual electron spins about an axis througb its centre. Isis believed that in highly magnetic materials, each atom has many more electrons spinning in one direction than in another.
In the submicroscopic region, i.e., the "domain", many of these atoms with electron spin in one direction create a magnetic field which effectively supplements the field engendered by the revolving electrons. Each domain thus becomes a tiny magnet. When the domains are in random state, the substance as a whole is not a magnet. The application of external magnetic field will reorient the domains and produce a magnet in the way described above.
When the application of an external magnetic force has been applied and all the domains have been aligned, the condition of MAGNETIC SATURATION has been reached, and any further increase in strength of the external force field will not increase the magnetisation of the iron any further. With the advent of the Adams Permanent Magnet Technology, is it not further evidence that conventional text teachings have reached the stage when they should be rewritten?
From the observations of certain lab experiments with ball-bearings, it is the opinion of the discoverer that the electrons circulate in conjugate pairs and have a spin opposite to that of rotation, and that the spin is four times greater than that of the orbital rotation. I note also that conventional texts prefer not to state direction of spin, nor velocity relative to orbital motion.
I do not therefore subscribe to the statement that "in highly magnetic materials, each atom has many more electrons spinning in one direction than in another". I feel such a condition cannot pertain in light of my discoveries.
Also to be addressed is the matter of the massive energy increase resulting from the Adams applied technology. Are man-made scientific laws once again violated? If the magnetic material is saturated when subjected to an external energy source, the Adams technology must then be gating space/gravity energy.
There is overwhelming evidence that space/gravity energy can be concentrated, focused and/or magnified by permanent magnets.
A young enthusiastic colleague of mine, currently resident in Auckland, New Zealand, by the name of Andrew Thorpe, phoned me today to advise that David Saltresse of Wales, Great Britain, had contacted him via email to advise him he had worked out the geometric placement of all 4 of the output A.C. generator windings of one of my motor generators which was originally invented in the early seventies.He advised Andrew that the geometric placement of the output generator stator windings was measured with the aid of incorporating the Golden Ratio. "All 4", David said, "are found to confirm they correspond directly with the golden ratio geometrics".
There was always the remote possibility that out of the many hundreds of people worldwide who would have attempted to replicate my original machines, few, if any, would have taken the advantage of probing deep into the detailed schematic diagram of this particular motor generator which I included in my original motor manual, published by Nexus Magazine, possibly because that schematic diagram appears at first glance unorthodox or a difficult exercise to achieve! As David Saltresse discovered, this is not so, if you look with eyes to see at this schemtic diagram. Congratulations go to David Saltresse of Wales.
Now, further secrets are revealed in which I can advise readers that I apply the so named "Sacred Geometry" of the golden ratio in conjunction with a very important natural occuring constant of nature. I also apply this same equation to resistance measurements, load resistances, voltage, geometrics of magnets, rotor and stator dimensions. This equation also applies to the mass and placement of the addition of certain unusual material used in the construction of this awesome heat generating rotor system. This is a unique system in that it is an implosive and totally reverse engineered mahcine which operates in the real realm of unity. The power manifested over time is "infinite" and therefore immeasurable. A reminder here to those unaccustomed to the understanding of the condition known as Infinite Energy, irrespective of any measurement of input energy losses and input power, there is no known value / measurement of infinite energy output power. Because of its infinity it simply cannot be measured!
From a number of reports I am in receipt of I find experimenters are using powerful rare earth magnets in their machines. This is in order only if you are incorporating the correct operating parameters, i.e., first of all upon handling the magnets, it is very quickly recognised that they are very powerful for such small dimensions. Does it not strike you then that since they display such obvious considerable power, is it then not logical that considerable impulsing power is going to be required to drive the machine once the magnets are installed in the device.The cardinal mistake being made here is that most of these experimenters are concerned about I²R losses! If you are seeking high/super performance with these powerful magnets, then discard all concerns in relation to Ohms Law, for in the Adams technologies Ohms Law becomes a non-entity. Instead of expecting results of a high order with stators of very low resistance, such as under 10ohms, increase the total series electrical resistance instead to 72ohms and instead of expecting spectacular results using these powerful magnets with only 12 - 24 volts, increase the voltage to a minimum of 120v. Upon having done this you must give attention to other important factors, i.e., stator to magnet air gap should be 1 - 1.25mm, impulse duty cycle should be 0.25 - 0.35, "mosfet" gate signal impulse 10 - 20v of good clean stable D.C. Upon initial experimental tests, I have always used batteries. Reduce the face area of stators to 75% of the magnet face.
Now having said all this, choose your own method of signal switching, whether it be photo, Hall, magnetic, reed or mechanical, etc.
Upon fine tuning, and now having reached greatly increased power and performance, 'DOUBLE' the power supply voltage to 240v and you will have a machine in the "kilowatt" range, the exciting stage of your progress. There are a number of various methods of harnessing considerable aetheric energy from these machines. In this respect I strongly urge you to study Tesla radiant energy.
Recommended Reading:
"Physics Without Einstein" by Dr. Harold Aspden, United Kingdom.
"Thermodynamics and Free Energy" by Dr. Peter A. Lindemann, USA.
"Secrets of Cold War Technology" by Gerry Vassilatos, USA.
"The Cosmic Pulse of Life" by Trevor James Constable, Hawaii.
"Nicola Tesla" by Leland Anderson, USA.
Miscellaneous Notes by Dr Adams
Construction Equation - Adams Motor Generator (20-12-1976)It was found, after considerable development work, that maximum electromagnetic effect produced in the stalloy [sic] stacked generating pole windings occurred when the dimension of the mating end of the stacks were four times greater in area than the rotor magnet's pole area. Hence the overall design of the machine incorporates this derived ratio of one to four. (The Adams Equation, as applies only to the Adams Machine).
Feedback (20-12-1976)
The feedback, produced by the output generating coil, produces a polarity reversal normally resulting in large eddy current losses in conventional machines, but, in the Adams Machine, it is harnessed to develop further additional torque to the magnetic rotor. The larger the output generating coils the greater the torque delivered to the rotor.
Power Factor (1-7-1976)
There is no power factor loss because the Adams Machine runs in a condition of resonance. Therefore, the Power Factor Loss is zero.
The Adams Pulsed Electric Generator: The Conspiracy
I have for many years been waiting the opportunity to make a start on writing about my life as an electrical engineer and inventor, but have been reluctant to do so because of the possible reaction from one formidable individual who was instrumental in causing me untold frustration, ridicule, anxiety, financial problems, and health decline.
With the passing of Rob Muldoon, I now feel more deposed to exposing what he and his regime subjected me to, and the possible subsequent valuable loss to our country as a result. I personally had a meeting with Muldoon and others at his home office in Tamaki regarding my invention.
The result of the meeting was that he recommended me to the Inventions Development Authority. In all good faith I duly contacted the inventions development authority and that folks was the beginning of the saga which was destined to follow.
The Inventions Development Authority passed me along to DSIR, who at the time were frantically working on their own energy systems, and assisting Government with various 'Think Big' projects.
Time rolled on, and DSIR monkeyed me around for several months; there were, as always, excuses for not proceeding with completion of their strange testing apparatus to test my machine.
In the meantime, Rob Muldoon appoints himself Minister in Charge of SIS, the department with world-wide connections to the CIA, ASIO, FBI and Interpol!
I had meanwhile, designed a bigger proving machine and had placed orders overseas for magnets and devices for pulsing equipment. Time went by, well beyond expected delivery dates, with no sign of the devices, nor any correspondence pertaining to my orders to any of the electrical companies.
I lodged person-to-person calls to the people who originally signed the confirming correspondence to me, to be told that "that person in no longer with us and we cannot help you any more."
Muldoon had by now, committed the whole country to the New Plymouth Power Station, Huntly Power Station, Marsden Oil Refinery, etc etc. The Government signalled its intentions that is was in no way going to let a little outsider like me come into the act with a revolutionary machine capable of countering the so-called energy crisis.
Muldoon at this stage, had me well taped up so to speak, My phone, I was informed, was tapped, my mail was intercepted and I was kept under observation.
I held a number of meetings with the Chief Post Office Investigating Officer regarding the matter of mail disappearance and interception, with the same negative and unsatisfactory answers and results as from other Government departments. After the lapse of several months, the machine was finally evaluated by DSIR.
I must mention here an interesting fact regarding the evaluation of my machine by the DSIR. It happens that a certain electrical engineer that I was involved with, who incidentally, also evaluated my machine, informed me that the person designated the role of evaluating my machine in DSIR, was in fact a mechanical engineer with no background, knowledge, nor qualifications of any description pertaining to electrical or electronic engineering, and further that the Auckland Division did not posses a member on the staff qualified to undertake such a project. This person none-the-less did do the evaluation and indeed signed the test results.
(You may well wonder how did this independent electrical engineer have such inside information on the DSIR? Well, it so happened that he himself had been their one and only electrical engineer in the Auckland Division, and I might add, a specialist on electrical motors too.)
That an unqualified person was assigned the task of evaluating the possibilities of a revolutionary motor is further evidence to me of conspiracy.
DSIR Evaluation - 5.8% efficiency ~ Lucas Industries Evaluation - 100% efficiency!
Other independent eminent engineers' findings, including those of the ex-electrical engineer from DSIR varied from 96.93% to 100% efficiency!
At this stage, I had unwittingly invited the then chief departmental district electrical engineer to be present at my laboratory to witness the phenomenon of one particular model displaying identical input and output wave forms on a twin beam oscilloscope with the machine windings running at ambient temperature, a condition which cannot be denied as proof of 100% efficiency, without any further tests being required.
He conceded there was no doubt whatever what he was witnessing was real, but like all academics who stick to their ivory tower scientific establishment beliefs, he said it could not be done.
Upon reading certain of my writings, it will be found that at one time in earlier years, I disbelieved in any kind of conspiracy regarding inventions pertaining to energy efficiency, and certain communication installations. I must now say, having unwittingly got myself into the web of the insidious conspiracy, through treading the path of an inventor in the field of free energy, that I now know from personal experience the pitfalls, stone walls, and blatant obstacles and barriers designed to hamper and silence inventors with such devices as energy efficient machines.
I decided to investigate the fate of a number of other excellent energy- efficient inventions, and learned that too many good inventions were never heard of again. Inventors themselves were turning into hermits, meeting with unexplained accidents, even totally disappearing. In many cases their laboratories were searched and ransacked, equipment confiscated and/or destroyed, and even attempts made on their lives. Others are frequently bought off in return for silence.
The conspirators, who are also the cartel operators are determined to continue to make mankind use fossil fuel for all possible energy requirements and will go to any lengths to achieve just that.
I have since superseded the above machine and have built and proven two different types of self-sustaining motor generators with efficiency ratings well beyond unity.
Adams Breaks the Gravity Barrier
Inventor Robert Adams appears to have broken the gravity barrier, with his advanced Adams Electric Motor Generator operating in a high state of resonance and apparently tapping gravitational energy.
"During the later months of 1992, I derived what I considered to be an equation for possibly the ultimate in rotary motor generator design. The purpose of this exercise, was to ascertain whether further unconventional design features of the machine parameters, using this equation, proved certain theories which I had previously discussed with Mr. Bruce Cathie, an internationally recognized New Zealand researcher in this field. (Cathie is the 'father' of grid harmonics)
Upon applying the 'equation' to the machine parameters and testing it, there was no doubt the machine was running in a higher state of resonance than previously obtained.
It had been arranged beforehand between myself and Mr. Cathie that, should the results of this test be of some substance, Mr. Cathie would travel from Auckland to Whakatane specifically to check the machine parameters with his 'harmonic equations'. These results confirmed the theory which we had previously discussed and planned to implement.
The results of these first trial tests have been SUPERCEDED, with the new figures obtained being found beyond anything that is known of in the present- day field of free energy research. There is every possibility that these latest figures, also, will be surpassed in the near future.
The equations and how they are applied are hidden within certain parameters, and, to this end, it could be said that to reach the ultimate in rotary overunity devices is not possible without the correct application to all parameters of the machine using the 'Adams Pulse Method' and the Adams-Cathie equations.
The above methods and results give us a valuable lead in the realm of solid-state gravitational energy research. The equations and methods of application in design procedures, however, remain, at this stage, secret. The efficiency figures possible from the device are such that they simply cannot be published.
I wish readers to refer further to the following discussions on Wilhelm Muller and Dr. Rolf Schaffranke, the general content of which relates to my discovery of the mysteries of magnetism some twenty-four years ago."
The Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator: On Wilhelm Muller
Reference to an article authored by Tom Valentine, California based freelance journalist, in regard to claims by Wilhelm Muller and his magnet manufacturers.
I must take Muller and his magnet manufacturers to task on their statement that "magnets can do a tremendous amount of work" --- this is not so. In an over-unity rotary machine, the magnets are 'assisting' to run the machine, but they are not generating the extra energy beyond the reaching of 100% efficiency. The magnets are not doing actual work, as such, beyond that point.
It is likely Muller's machine is operating, according to the efficiency figure Muller quoted, somewhere on the near lower end of a positive resonance curve. From the generally known information on his device, this would be the likely area in which it is operating. If this is so, then the chances of greater efficiency are slim, particularly on account of it appearing to be operating in a positive mode. For the rotor magnets to operate as a gate to harness gravitational energy beyond unity, it must be in a negatively resonant mode and not operating in a closed magnetic circuit system.
Bruce Cathie and I spent an entire day together in January 1993 going over his harmonic equations in regard to my advanced machine, and confirmed that it was running in an advanced state of resonance, harnessing gravitational energy and demonstrating evidence of the magnets forming a 'gate' to harness one half-cycle of the gravitational pulse, but doing no actual work over and above the 100%.
In regard to another claim by Muller that he had to use powerful neodymium magnets, this also is contrary to our findings. It matters not whether you use standard off-the-shelf 'alnico' magnets or powerful magnets, the results are no different. It is not necessary to use powerful magnets to prove if a machine can be constructed with over unity capability. This fact has been shown repeatedly with the Adams machines, using small and weak magnets.
The inference also that Nikola Tesla might have required today's advanced magnetic materials to achieve over unity results, is also totally wrong. The only difference between using ordinary magnets like 'alnico' and, for instance, 'samarium cobalt', is that you get greater energy output from the stronger magnets by way of their ability to detect and amplify this energy on a greater scale; and, therefore, upon utilizing the Adams pulsing system, you can have a device using any ordinary magnets capable of not only 100% efficiency, but also of being tuned into operating as a gate in detecting and delivering gravitational energy.
As for the establishment's texts stating that "magnets do NO real work", the establishment, for once, is correct. It is, however, interesting to note that this is a very 'convenient' fact for the establishment to expound upon - there could be an underlying inference here that magnets are useless for machines designed to achieve beyond unity results.
Permanent magnets and their place in science today need to be more fully understood."
On Dr. Rolf Schaffranke
"Reference to an article written by Dr. Schaffranke in THE MANUAL OF FREE ENERGY DEVICES AND SYSTEMS, VOLUME TWO, published by D.A. Kelly, in which on page 7, paragraphs 7 and 12, Dr. Schaffranke erroneously maintains it is NECESSARY to use super magnets to tap gravitational energy.
I found that my original 1970 open magnetic circuit motor generator is superior to my 1976 closed magnetic circuit model in regard to the results of obtaining and maintaining a correct harmonic vacuum oscillation and so tapping gravitational energy during one half-cycle of the gravitational pulse wave.
People who make such claims regarding the use of super magnets, obviously have little or no experience in the realms of rotary free-energy devices using permanent magnets. Over twenty years ago, I proved that even tiny weak magnets bought off the shelf and incorporated into my machines yielded efficiency into the hundreds of per cent over unity.
A permanent magnet is an entity unto itself. It is no different in any way whatsoever from its brothers made of different materials; it is still a permanent magnet irrespective of its gauss rating.
These claims are tantamount to saying that you can get more than 2.2 volts out of a lead acid cell simply by increasing its ampere hour rating, or conversely, you use a ten horsepower motor to run a machine that only requires one horsepower.
I reiterate: the sooner science rejects conventionalism, the better for humankind.
If indeed magnets were doing a tremendous amount of work, they certainly would not last long in any machine. There are secrets and mysteries surrounding magnets and collapsing field energies, and only after exhaustive studies of these two phenomena in practice, do these mysteries unravel themselves and emerge in their glory, and, correctly applied through the use of the required mathematics, pave the way to tapping gravitational energy in astronomical quantity.
For high-power rotary machines, however, super magnets are the obvious choice, for reasons of higher power capabilities, reduced weight and volume. When installed in an 'Adams' machine, these super magnets enable the opening up of clearances between rotor and stator without appreciable loss due to the high overall efficiency of this machine.
If indeed it were possible to induce magnets to do a tremendous amount of work, as claimed by the aforementioned people, then I claim that the magnets must first have very substantial energy imparted to them to undertake the task ahead. Secondly, when reaching this 'tremendous' state, they would start heating up and continue to do so until they reach the point whereby their magnetism would begin disintegrating, and continue to do so until the machine would eventually come to a halt, unable to start again.
There are a lot of people out there striving for the ultimate in rotary electrical machines. They all have my personal blessings for their endeavors, but may I hasten to add for those who make such claims, that they exhibit a lack of experience and knowledge of the capabilities of permanent magnets in rotary electrical machines.
But don't be disappointed, readers, as I assure you that permanent magnets are indeed the answer to free energy. Correctly adapted to a rotary machine they are the 'gateway' to harnessing gravitational energy.
With the application of the 'Adams resonant pulse frequency equation' and the 'Cathie harmonic equations' combined with the 'Adams Pulsed EMG System', incredible energies can be very easily and cleanly made available.
I wish to state to all readers at this particular stage, that I have only, in the past year, made the decision to publish certain aspects from my twenty years work in the field of free energy research.
There are no doubt many other researchers who, for various reasons such as lack of finance, fear, suppression and very many other barriers, have not had even a chance to be heard. It is to be hoped the day will soon arrive when all can benefit from our work."
The Adams Pulsed Electric Motor Generator (January 1993)
An explanation to readers on matters pertaining to hysteresis loss, eddy current loss, magnetic drag. Also some advice regarding further information required from enquiries received to date by interested parties:
I would first like to state that it has been made clear that this machine has been proven to be capable of over-unity performance, plus the fact that it has proven itself capable of returning energy to its supply source. So we now come to the matters mentioned above.If a machine is to run at unity or better, it must first 'overcome' those problems found in the conventional machine, which, of course, are principally those of magnetic drag, hysteresis loss and eddy currents, all of which waste energy in heat and hence require a cooling fan - with its attendant losses as well.
As explained previously, the Adams machine runs cool in comparison to the conventional machine and does not, therefore, require a cooling fan. Now these factors surely speak for themselves. It must also be borne in mind by the reader that in the conventional AC or DC machine, the internal heat of windings and stators reach boiling point within fifteen minutes. The Adams machine does not have this problem.
Given these salient factors, which in themselves are a starting point for those of you who are forward-thinking, I feel I have provided sufficient hints, information and guidance to enable those astute enough to realize the potentiality of the principles given, to build a machine for themselves according to their own leanings as well as along the lines of the Adams machine.
Most of you know of the manual which has been published and distributed by NEXUS Magazine. My purpose in compiling this manual is to give those interested an insight into the principles of the mysteries of my machine, and I expect those interested, patient and persevering enough to accept that they must work out and work with these mysteries and to, like myself, to battle to get there. Only then will true understanding and enlightenment reveal itself and true reward, however slowly, be theirs.Notwithstanding these statements however, I submit here a few further valuable recommendations for readers, and as time progresses, and as time permits, some further such tidbits of information will be drip-fed through NEXUS as a form of encouragement to all concerned.
I would like to inform readers at this point in time that, because of the steady flow of response I have had since publication in NEXUS, by enthusiasts, interested parties and investors alike, it is no longer possible to address enquiries of the nature of those above individually, other than on a consultancy basis. Although I will continue to contribute certain articles to NEXUS as long as I am able, and will continue to personally reply to all mail, I ask readers to kindly understand that a good deal of my time is involved in consultancy already on my advanced projects, so my free time is somewhat limited. I encourage readers to keep their eyes on NEXUS as I intend to remain as loyal to them as they are to me.
Here, then, are those few further recommendations to readers. If contemplating the construction of a proving machine, note as follows :
(1) Don't purchase expensive powerful 'neodymium' or 'samarium cobalt' magnets without first having experience with cheap easy-to-get 'alnico' magnets, for if you commence with powerful magnets you will find yourself facing powerful problems. Using powerful magnets will not prove anything beyond what alnico will do. However, given this, if you feel you MUST choose powerful magnets, for whatever your reasons, take heed -great care is required in the handling of them to preclude personal injury.
(2) For a proving machine do not use less than 10 ohms each for two stators at 180 degrees apart; recommend series mode for first attempt. Don't be concerned about start windings initially and, remember, what can be achieved MICROscopically can be achieved MACROscopically and so I strongly suggest - walk before you run.
(3) Should you experience any difficulty in designing and constructing the tapered disc contactor (machining, etc.) then use electronic switching, i.e. photo, Hall effect, or inductor effect, with switching current transistor, etc. The machine, correctly constructed, should still deliver a minimum 107% efficiency. The charging effect will, of course, be lost, and the input current to supply the electronic switching will raise the total input quite steeply. The point to be made here is that in using electronic switching, in a larger machine, the degree of loss due to this use of electronic switching is negligible.
However, for those who are seeking greater efficiency figures, it is advised to stay with the tapered disc contactor method and build a small wattage unit, i.e. 0.25 to 1 watt. This is the area of power rating within which you will gain quicker and better results which, in turn, will provide the necessary experience for designing and building a larger unit.
Once again the inventor cannot stress the importance enough, for those who wish to construct a successful device, to start at the bottom rung and listen to what the device is saying to you as you go along.
Note for the Curious
I have received a lot of requests regarding an explanation accounting for such low temperature operation on full load. This one fact alone is indisputable evidence of a very high efficiency rating.I have therefore decided to make up a set of drawings which will explain to the reader the questions regarding hysteresis, eddy current and magnetic drag losses, as well as temperature ratings, etc.
These drawings will be accompanied with written explanations concerning the 'how'and 'why' of certain factors.
These drawings and their accompanying information will be available directly from the inventor at the address given below at a cost of NZ $20.00 including postage.
Meanwhile, for further information on the 'Adams and Cathie' projects, you'll find it all in your future issues of NEXUS."
http://www.geocities.com/theadamsmotor/index.htmlTim Harwood's Replication of the Adams Motor-Generator
The Adams machine was quite the topic of discussion at the April 1993 ISNE conference in Denver. It was first broken to the public attention by NEXUS magazine, published in Australia...As to the ADAMS motor, I am a bit puzzled with the comments that gravitational energy is somehow used in the machine. From my admittedly limited understanding, it simply appears that he is using the back EMF to give additional thrust and thus a much higher efficiency.
With the use of the back EMF, there would be little if any hysteresis from the "collision" of the forward EMF with the back EMF and thus the reduction in heating.
We at KeelyNet would greatly appreciate reports from anyone reading this who might choose to build or otherwise experiment with the principle. You may upload as a text file or send a photo copy to the Vanguard Sciences address at the top of the document. Thanks.... >>> Jerry Decker
~~~~~
Date: 12 Mar 94 20:56:00 ~ From: David Galea ~ To: all ~ Subj: Adams Motor/GeneratorHello all: I am new to this echo area and I am not sure if anyone has discussed this topic before.
I have obtained plans for constructing a motor/generator from a Mr. Robert Adams in New Zealand and I have begun construction.
Seven people have since built this device in Australia and it seems to work fine, but no-one can explain the efficiency anomaly that occurs after about 15 minutes of running time. In the two that I have personally seen, the eff. rating jumps from 85% (normal) then after about 15 mins goes to around 120%.
We have set up oscilloscopes, amp meters, volt meters, temp meters and can't account for the increase.
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the rotor, but we are still stumped.
Any ideas ? My intention is for it to be a Battery Charger.
David Galea (Melbourne Australia.)
~~~~~
There are some peculiar activities that have happened with regard to the Adams motor. As you can see from the above email, these fellows claim to know of 7 people who have successfully replicated the Adams motor.In 1993, everyone was hot for it, wanting plans and such. Within a very short period, there was a business arrangement made with Adams which we heard was to produce a UNITY motor to be patented and sold in the U.K.
Sometime toward the end of 1993, the talk was that the Adams motor had not proven out, that no one had successfully duplicated the effect or there was some anomaly in the measurement method. A very bizarre turnaround if you read the above email.
At the 1994 ISNE meeting, Bill McMurtry of New Zealand gave a presentation in which he said flat out that the Adams motor did not work. We took Bill to dinner with Tom Bearden and Ken McNeil, but did not have an opportunity to speak with him in detail because he and Ken had some items to discuss in private.
The collaboration of Adams with Bruce Cathie had increased the over unity output to numbers that were so incredible as to warrant not publishing them. I read something about it being on the order of 1:3000. At any rate, the Adams motor is far from dead if there have been independent successes.
I first heard of Robert Adams and his motor at a mountain retreat west of Denver, Colorado during the days just before a New Energy Symposium. That was in April 1993. A benefactor [Bill & Lynda Beierwalts] interested in knowing the truths about "free energy" and its potential for solving the world's pollution problems had funded the expenses of the invited speakers and the preliminary "think tank" event at that retreat. My talk was about magnetism and the aether as an energy source, but our "think tank" groups each had an allocated theme. We were expected to point the finger at the best candidate for onward investigation, from the vague information and reports we had about discoveries and claims pertaining to the new energy world.
New Energy News, Vol. 4, No. 8, December 1996, pp. 1-7.The Adams & Aspden Motor Patent
by Harold AspdenYes, there were several to choose from, machines involving magnets and solid-state devices such as that devised by Hans Coler, dating from the World War II era, or the then-current activity of Sparky Sweet (now deceased). In fact, one of our team, a colleague from U.K., had visited Sweet just prior to that Colorado meeting. However, specific information as to how to build any of these devices was not available, nor was there any acceptable theoretical account of their operation on which we could recommend action.
Fortunately, however, someone had brought with him information publicized by the NEXUS magazine and a Manual, available from Nexus, describing a motor devised by a New Zealander named Robert Adams. "Over-Unity" performance was claimed and enough was disclosed as a blue print for replication of the machine. We did not really understand how the motor could operate quite as well as Adams had indicated, but we were convinced that "over-unity" was in prospect. Accordingly, as it seemed easy to build a motor such as Adams described, our group settled for the recommendation that the Adams motor should be looked into and somehow constructed to verify its performance.
That was how I first came to know about the Adams motor.
Collaboration with Adams
At that time such experimental work that I had pursued on the "free energy" theme was basically on solid-state magnetic systems and, in collaborating with a Scotsman, Scott Strachan, I had been involved with the invention of a thermoelectric device which was extremely efficient at converting low grade heat into electricity. Undoubtedly, it defied the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but that point was not stressed in those early days. That invention had proved problematic because the devices built worked for a while by repeated operation for half an hour or so at a time, day after day, for several months, but then came the inevitable progressive weakening in conversion efficiency, ending with a defunct piece of equipment.
The story on that is told between pages 124 and 128 of Jeane Manning's excellent book, The Coming Energy Revolution - The Search for Free Energy, ISBN 0-89529-713-2 published in 1996 by Avery Publishing Group, Garden City Park, New York.
I was distracted from that thermoelectric venture when I took a more practical interest in the magnetic reluctance motor, inspired by what we had heard about Robert Adams. I was to be distracted again towards the end of 1995 when the Correa "Abnormal Pulsed Glow Discharge" invention came to my attention, with its 5:1 over-unity feature clearly demonstrated. And now, as year-end 1996 approaches, I am destined to be distracted again, this time by having discovered myself why those thermoelectric devices mentioned above had failed. The remedy is easy as the problem does not involve deterioration. It is as if a bistable system has flipped to its off-state and just needs to be flipped back into its on-state, provided, that is, one knows what to flip!
Now, to come to the point about my collaboration with Robert Adams, I am writing these words on October 28th, 1996 and in a week from now the granted patent I have procured jointly with Robert Adams will become available from the British Patent Office in its issued form. It is Patent No. GB 2,282,708. I plan, in these pages, to introduce my own motor research and relate it to that patent and explain my connection with Adams.
I am also mindful that Adams, now recognized by an honorary doctorate from the Open International University of Sri Lanka, to become Dr. Robert George Adams, has recently published an addendum to the Adams Motor Manual entitled: "The Revelation of the Century" and has included in that work some of my written contributions.
The immediate focus of my attention, however, is a rather critical letter communication authored by Michio Kaku and sent to a programme producer of a radio station based in New York. It was dated May 20th 1996, but it is only now that I have become aware of this communication from Robert Adams' new book.
Adams need not have included Kaku's letter in his book, but he did and I commend him for it. Apart from saying that Robert Adams was either the next Einstein and Newton rolled into one or a crackpot, he made these two comments:
"Apparently, he (Adams) wants to extract energy from the aether by using rotating magnets, thereby violating the first law of thermodynamics (conservation of mass and energy). This is an ancient idea, going back centuries and was most popular in the 1880s, but was disproved by the Michelson-Morley experiment and Einstein's relativity theory. Aether, which was supposed to be a magical substance which pervaded the universe, has never been measured in our laboratories."
"The proof is in the pudding. He (Adams) has to show a blueprint of his machines, show that they in fact generate energy, and show with a few equations how his theory works. Lacking a blueprint, a mathematical theory, and, say, video tapes of his motors generating energy from nothing, I cannot say with 100% certainty that he is wrong. (Only 99.99%)"
Now, having just had an "over-unity" motor patent granted in which I share inventorship with Adams, I will assume that those Kaku remarks are addressed also in my direction and reply accordingly, point by point.
Firstly, as a educational exercise, the extraction of energy from the aether does not violate the first law of thermodynamics. By definition or simple semantics, if you extract energy from something and move it from that something, A, into something else, B, the energy remains conserved overall. The first law of thermodynamics dates from before the time when the transmutation of mass and energy was recognized as the stellar power source by Sir James Jeans (1904). A critic might say, however, as Jeans himself did in his 1928 book EOS, that Isaac Newton knew of photosynthesis by which radiant energy transmitted through space is captured by plants and convened into matter, which stores energy by creating a combustible product. The transmutability of energy and mass was not discovered, nor was it first suggested, by Einstein. He was too late.
Secondly, the existence of the aether was not disproved by Einstein. Indeed, Einstein has not proved anything, nor has he disproved anything. One simply cannot flaunt Einstein's theory around as a reason for rejecting the prospect of an "over-unity" motor. On the contrary, ask yourself why there are plans to test Einstein's theory at a cost of $500,000,000 dollars by launching Gravity Probe B in 1999. If Einstein's theory is right, why are there any doubts warranting expenditure on that scale?
Thirdly, Kaku says the aether has never been measured in our laboratories and that its existence was disproved by the Michelson-Morley Experiment. The fact is that Michelson did not perform the experiment to test or refute the existence of the aether. He lived another 44 years after performing that experiment and believed in the aether to his dying day. He was trying to sense the Earth's motion through the aether, but, since standing waves developed by mirror reflection had not been discovered when the experiment was planned, he had not allowed for that to affect the result observed. In fact, the aether energy stored in those standing waves, being trapped in the mirror system, makes the wave motion appear to be locked to the frame of reference of the mirrors, and not the aether as expected. The aether certainly was detected in the laboratory when Michelson found he could detect the Earth's rotation relative to that non-rotating aether by his light wave interference experiments jointly with Gale in 1925.
The aether was detected some years earlier by Sagnac in France and is detected in modern navigation technology by the ring laser gyro. How can the speed of a laser beam traveling around a closed path inside an optical instrument detect rotation of that instrument if the beam is not keeping a fixed speed relative to something inside that instrument that does not share its rotation? That something is the aether! No amount of book learning or mathematics can avoid that simple truth, and even though the word aether is seen as something magical, it is that something that delivers free energy once we have decoded the combination of the magnetic lock which restrains its release. Note also, that the aether reveals its existence when we have rotation and we have rotation in the Adams motor.
Fourthly, as to Kaku's pudding, which comes first, the chicken or the egg, the blueprint and the working machine, or the theory and the equations? Though we have no answer to this question of priority, we know there are chickens and we know there are eggs, so it really does not matter which comes first. Certainly, it seems, that in order for Kaku to decide whether free energy is possible, albeit with only 0.01% chance, there has to be a theory, a machine and an aether.
It is for this very reason that I have made special effort during 1996 and published my book Aether Science Papers as a forerunner of the Energy Science Report describing my own "free energy" motor research. This Report No. 9 in the series is entitled Over-Unity Motor Design and its date of publication is November 6th 1996, two days before the first disclosure of details of my machine at a New Energy symposium held in Rotterdam in The Netherlands.
The formal electrical engineering theory explaining the motor operation in tapping "free energy" is contained in a few pages in the Energy Science Report #9. The motor design is described and a photograph of the machine is included. Moreover there is an outline blueprint that indicates the design of the multi-megawatt versions of the machine. However, as to the ether, or 'aether,' to use my normal terminology, describing that in full detail needs more than a few pages for scientific proof and, as Kaku well realizes, the wisdom needed exceeds the talents of even an Einstein or a Newton.
About the Aether
I will digress here, just for a moment, before getting back to Robert Adams and the subject of the Adams-Aspden patent. My reason is another comment made by Kaku in that quoted communication. He asserted as a conclusion:
"Inventors want to solicit money from investors, so I have a moral obligation to say exactly what I think about issues that, at some point, may hurt people."
Now that is a very poor reason for attacking someone's lifelong efforts to probe the secrets of science with a view to advancing both knowledge and technology beneficial to mankind. The facts of life are that it is investors who want to solicit money by making profit from the creative endeavors of inventors. Invariably, inventors get hurt anyway, without some well-meaning individual doing his moral duty by hurting the inventor more by unwarranted criticism. Is it really a moral obligation to preach the gospel of Einstein's theory in contending that investors should steer clear of Robert Adams, when his only thought is to have his efforts recognized?
Of course, by the nature of things, the free-lance inventor can go adrift in a technical sense and then, if ensnared by those investors, he can be carried off into obscurity by a tidal wave of turmoil. Meanwhile the orthodox scientific establishment stands by and watches, mildly amused at the futile efforts of the free-lance inventor who ventures beyond the level of gimmicks for use in the household and garden. That is the way it is.
As to my book Aether Science Papers, it shows how so much of vital importance, explained by neither Einstein's theory nor quantum theory, has a straightforward answer. Just as Robert Adams in New Zealand and I in England sit poles apart on this our Earth, yet we are governed by the same laws of physics and subject to the same constants of physics. Body Earth is our common rotating frame of reference, but body Earth does not explain why those physical constants are, so far we know, universal. We take that for granted, just as our forebears took for granted the fact that they all inhabited the same aether. Our modernist society and its Einstein enthusiasts tell us there is no aether and so, Robert, you are on your own and only God can tell you why your experiments would work as well in England as they do in New Zealand!
You might then wonder why scientists at the U.S. Bureau of Standards, at the National Physical Laboratory in England and at the equivalent CSIRO National Measurement Laboratory in Australia bother to measure the same physical constants to very high precision. Give or take a fraction of a part in a million attributable to experimental error, they always come out the same. Surely, that is because the aether spreads through all those locations and has the same structure everywhere. What do I mean by structure? Well, you need to look up the paper in Physics Letters, 41A, 423-424 (1972), entitled "Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant" to find the answer. That paper emerged from the Australian CSIRO laboratory just mentioned. It shows how alpha, the most basic dimensionless constant in quantum theory, is derived by aether theory to give:
1/alpha = 108 Pi SQRT(2) N**(-1/6)
and how N is found to have the lowest cell energy if N is 1843. This gives 1/a;pha as 137.0359, correct to part per million precision in comparison with its measurement at any of those laboratories. If there were no aether, then you might as well think of a number and try that, though it would be your ghost that makes that effort because you would no longer exist.
Of course, there will be the Kaku's of this world who say that the above formula is mere number play, contrived to fit known results. Well, that may be true for Einstein's "1,2,3" theory, but it certainly is untrue for the aether theory. You see, all Einstein did by the disguised mathematics of his General Theory of Relativity was to say (1) that the spectral redshift was the same as that evident by use of Newtonian theory, given that energy gravitates, (2) that light beams grazing past stars are deflected by twice the amount expected from Newtonian theory and (3) that planets describe orbits around the sun as if the planet's motion-dependent attraction is three times stronger than the value predicted by classical theory. It is so easy to contrive a theory for a 2 and a 3 factor. A German schoolmaster Paul Gerber had, in 1898, 18 years ahead of Einstein, presented a theory for the '3' factor, based on the speed-of-light propagation of gravity across space, but that was not mentioned by Einstein. The factor of 3 arises because the energy transfer between sun and planet is not confined to a pencil thin line drawn between sun and planet, but rather fans out as it transfers to the aether field and then converges on its target after taking more time over the longer route.
Einstein's theory is sterile. It offers no physical insight into the truths of the role played by the aether. It cannot explain the 137.0359 that governs quantum theory and, even on its own territory, it cannot explain the dimensionless constant involving G, the constant of gravity, nor, indeed, can it explain the unifying link between electrodynamics and gravitation!
So, Robert out there in New Zealand, take note that you are in a part of the universe where the aether has the energy state corresponding to N having the value 1843! Note that I first discovered the formula long ago in the 1950s using an engineer's slide rule, backed up by logarithmic tables for higher precision.
Take further note that, years after that 1972 paper was published, a famous astronomer in USA (Tifft), discovered that distant galaxies closely paired or in small groups exhibited differences in red shift. The differences were always multiples of 72.5 km/s in relation to the speed of light. Explaining this is a complete mystery. Why should Planck's radiation constant be different from one galaxy to the next? Well, if you, the reader, were to study my aether theory, you could work out that, since aether energy density throughout space has to be uniform on a universal scale, the spectral emission frequency of a radiating atom will vary in proportion to N**(4/9). It varies as alpha**2 and also by a further cube root of this factor, which gives the power 4/9.
Now take 1843 as the base value of N and decrease it in steps as you look for higher energy per unit cell states in different galactic regions. You will find that the result is the 72.5 km/s observed by Tifft. Check that by calculating 4c/9N as N decreases from 1843 to 1828, c being the speed of light. Check the Tifft paper to verify what I say: W.G. Tifft, Astronomical Journal, 211, 31-46 (1977). You will see his comment that he could find no evidence of gravitational interaction between those adjacent galaxies! So, what has happened to Einstein's theory. It requires universal gravitation with each of you being an individual observer at the center of your own universe. I would rather believe in the aether, knowing that there is proof of its reality, and devote my efforts to tapping some of its store of energy to safeguard the future of mankind from unnecessary pollution.
The Adams Motor and the Adams-Aspden Patent
I have not built an Adams motor as described in his Manual. I do know that when I returned to Denver in May 1994 for the New Energy Symposium there were machines on show or described in the Proceedings which purported to be Adams motors but they did not perform over-unity. It was reported that one such machine came very close to being 100% efficient. Adams did not attend that meeting. However, in the intervening year I had struck up a contact with Adams. I found he was under the impression that such machines are unpatentable and I had skills in the patent field as well as knowledge about the physics governing the operation of motors and magnetism generally. In fact, I already had a granted US patent for a motor designed for over-unity operation, but never built [US Patent 4,975,608]. Adams had possession of motors which he claimed had the over-unity performance. I had, at the Denver 1993 meeting, declared my belief that over-unity motors were possible and supported the plan to explore the Adams machine.
My distant association with Adams resulted in an exchange of technical information and the proposal to adapt the design of his motor in a novel way. His motor had open-ended magnetic stators and magnets in a single plane forming radial arms. The invention, we jointly devised, placed the magnets axially parallel with the rotor shaft, fitted two sets of toothed rotor pieces and made the stators into bridging yokes. The resulting configuration was of the form shown in Fig. 1, taken from the patent specification that we filed in U.K.
The machine has to work over-unity, if properly designed, because the magnetic flux switching assures that much of the flux across the pole gaps is diverted, as the poles separate, so that it still links the magnetizing windings but finds a return closure path sideways from the rotor pieces and so exerts no braking action on the motor. The magnets provide the drive torque pulling the poles into register when no current is applied to the windings.
Fig. 1. (shows the components, numbers 12 - 18)
The input of current drives the flux from the stator bridging yokes and forces it into the lateral route as the poles separate.
There can be no input of inductive power by the magnetizing winding if there is no change of net flux linkage. It will change to some degree but, if the design were perfect, then the machine could run on negligible inductive power input. That leaves normal resistance loss and some magnetization loss, much of which can be reduced by making the machine larger and more powerful. A small machine could prove the principle, especially if we allowed for the heat generated in the windings and explored the overall energy situation to see if we really are tapping energy from the aether.
The patent application was filed on 30th September 1993. I named myself and Adams as joint applicants and joint inventors. It has now been granted, as already stated. However, in May 1994, during the early days of its patent pendency, I encountered the reaction of those in Denver who had been unable to confirm "over-unity" operability of the Adams motor. I saw our patent application as offering an improved design, but there were clouds developing and Adams was facing the problem of defending his position. As background also there was the rumor about rival Japanese motors and, as things developed, I heard of claims for a machine constructed in Hawaii that indicated over-unity operation and could, for all I knew, be quite similar to the one covered by the Adams-Aspden patent application.
I was not too sure how Robert Adams was measuring his energy input and his energy output, so I could not vouch for his performance claims and, indeed, Robert was careful about the information he did disclose. When I heard he was adopting calorific measurement to verify the output energy, which would include heat generated in windings as well as magnetization loss, then 1 felt we were on track towards confirming the performance rating. I still wonder about the measurement of input power, having regard to the pulsed form of the current, and I am not reassured by the reference to the communication from the Group Research Center of Joseph Lucas Ltd which Robert includes in his new book The Revelation of the Century.
That said, however, going back to that 1994 period, I felt I had to take more initiative myself and so I decided to ask the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry to consider my application in a competition for an award of research funding based on a meritorious invention proposal. I offered something new, based on a new patent application, and backed by the patent cover I already had from my U.K. patent corresponding to the US patent already mentioned. In August 1994, though I was 66 years of age, I won that award and had 75% of research costs covered by the U.K. government. In the event that funding carried my motor research through to year-end 1995.
I did not build the specific form of machine shown in Fig. 1, but instead constructed a motor that was designed to contain the magnetic flux more effectively within what became a single all embracing magnetizing winding enclosing the whole motor. This is the basis of my own initiative on the "over-unity" machine and, as the U.K. patent specification on this new machine is to be published early in December 1996, I am now releasing information by publication on November 6th of my Energy Science Report No. 9 entitled "Power from Magnetism: Over-Unity Motor Design." Figure 12 of that Report, backed by design detail, shows how the over-unity factor is determined and I reproduce that figure below as Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 (Plot of B vs. H)
Without going into full details, note that the diagram is an idealization of a B-H magnetization curve. It has a linear B-H relationship drawn through the origin O but at high flux density levels the curve bends over as it creeps towards saturation and the slope of the curve drops. The areas a, b, c and d, respectively, represent energy density input in energizing the magnetic system. The areas a and b apply for low flux range magnetization over the lower part of the curve. The areas c and d apply to flux changes confined to the upper region. Areas a and c are energy inputs from the magnetizing winding, whereas c and d are energy inputs that electrical engineers never consider, because that energy is supplied by the aether.
Where does the energy go? That is an interesting question fully explained in my Report, but the answer, simply, is that it is pooled by being shared equally between the space occupied by the ferromagnetic core and the space taken up by the air gaps in the core. That energy in the air gaps, or pole gaps in the motor, provides the mechanical drive.
So, you can see for yourself that, if you run the motor over the lower flux density range, which is normal, then you operate at an efficiency which cannot exceed (a+b)/2a, which is 100%. On the other hand, if the motor operates over the higher range, the efficiency can reach up to (c+d)/2c, which is very much higher than 100%!
Consider some realistic figures by putting the knee in the curve at 15,000 gauss and assuming that the incremental B/H ratio is 1000 over the lower range but only 50 over the upper range. Operate the stator core of the motor up to a B value of 20,000. H ranges from 15 to 115 over this upper range. Work out the area c as being (15 + 115) x 5000/2 or 325,000 and the area d as being (15,000 + 20,000) x 100/2 or 1,750,000. You will then see that operation close to 319% efficiency is indicated!
Be less ambitious in power output terms and run the motor over an upper range between 15,000 and 17,000 gauss, to find that area c is (15 + 55) x 2000/2 or 70,000 and the area d is (15,000 + 17,000) x 40/2 which is 640,000. (c+d)/2c is then 507%!
If the aether delivers energy on loan to you and you use it to run the motor as the poles come together but refuse to give it back, then the aether has to replenish itself by taking power from its own vast pool of energy activity. It merely ripples to find a new level of equilibrium just as the sea will recover if you take a bucket of water from it. Eventually, that energy borrowed finds its way back to the aether as we spend it by generating heat radiation.
[ Boxed Text: ] "If you do not believe what I say, then wait and watch the progress as those who believe, be it Robert Adams or whoever, decide to build a magnetic reluctance motor heeding the design principlpes I have recorded in my Report." [ End Boxed Text ]
As a final note I will echo one message which I have independently mentioned in my Report No. 7 (the Report used to brief the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry on my Award progress). It is that magnetic reluctance motors already being manufactured that are said to be 80% or 90% (or even 96% efficient as I now see reported on page 21 of the U.K. Institution of Mechanical Engineers 16 October 1996 issue of Professional Engineering) are already trespassing upon forbidden territory. That level of efficiency is either a false claim or the motors are already regenerating power from heat dissipated as loss.
Alternative Energy Institute (July 17, 2002) ~ www.altenergy.org/news/newsletter79/copy79/copy79.htmlAdams' Invention Poached Down Under
According to a recent article published by an Australian newspaper, two Australian inventors have developed the world's "first commercial machine which can power a house from a clean, green virtually free energy source." The story has been posted on the Aethmogen Technologies: New Energy Scientists website "for those interested in the subject of reverse engineering, plagiarism, and stolen intellectual and other property." In response to the anticipated production of the "Lutec 1000 Motor/Generator," noted Australian inventor Dr. Robert Adams reports background details to enforce his argument that this magnetic motor cannot be patented. Adam's writes, "This invention, which is mine, was granted a British Patent in 1996 along with Dr. Harold Aspden of the United Kingdom (IBM's Patent Director for 19 years), was placed in the public domain by international publication in Nexus Magazine and according to International Patent law, thenceforth becomes unpatentable!" Learn more about this unfolding drama from Down Under.
Doctor of Science (Hon).
The Ancient Royal Assyrian Order of Merit.
Founder of the New Zealand Section of the Institute of Electracial and Electronic Engineers Inc., New York (I.E.E.E) 29.5.1968
Elected Chairman of Region 10, N.Z.I.E.E.E. (1969 and 1970).
Elected Fellow of the New Zealand Electronics Institute 1969.
Mumber of Auckland Institute and Museum.
Member of The Scientific and Medical Network, U.K.
Member of New Zealand Electrical Institute Inc.
Member of Royal Society of New Zealand.
1969 - Invented the Adams Switched Reluctance Motor Generator
1975 - Discoverer of the Impulse method of charging batteries
1993 - Discovered a procedure to engineer magnetic polarity reversal
1995 - Invented the Adams Super Power Four Pole Permanent Magnet
1996 - Invented the Mark 024 Thermo Switched Reluctance Motor which resulted in the discovery of anomalous unforseen massive heat energy in addition to electric power generationCurrent and Immediate Past Position ~ Involved in research and development of the Adams Super Power Thermo Impulse Salient Pole Open Magnetic Circuit Reluctance Electric Motor/Generator which incorporates the development of the science and technology involved in the hornessing of aether energy via electromagnetics.
Other Interests and Research:
Seismology and alternative medicine, together with Dr Wilhelm Reich's and Dr Ruth Drown's biophysics.
Interests and Concerns
Surround the imperative requisite that mankind cease and desist confounding the balance of his planet's ecology and focus with urgency upon the sources of clean energy which surrounds him at all times and is free for the taking. Pollution is now unnecessary, as is the wanton destruction of rain forests, waterways and our oceans. Concentration on the pollution of the human body and a reversal to natural medicine accompanied by a sane diet might perhaps be the best first step.
Dr Robert Adams
Original: rexresearch.com/adamotor/adamotor.htm
Copyright: RexResearch, 2022
