Subject: Re: PM_Square ! Permanent Magnet Powered Motor !

From: [email-masked] (Kevin Jessup)
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 10:00:46 UNDEFINED

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Stefan Hartmann) writes:

>Well, I have worked together with the inventor and another "magnet freak"
>during this weekend on the design and we found the solution how to power a  
>motor just via using Permanent Magnets !

Not THIS again!!!!

Nice little ASCII pictures.  However, I saw NO thermodynamic or mass
to energy equations.  Care to enlighten those of us who like math as
to WHERE the energy comes from??

Nobody believes this crap.  If it really works, BUILD a product (and there
are THOUSANDS of applications if it really DOES work) and you will become
the richest man on Earth, thus proving your point.

No need to pollute the space of the SCI newsgroups.

--
Kevin Peter Jessup, Software Engineer        Marquette Electronics, Inc
[email-masked]                  Milwaukee, WI  MarqEL NASDAQ
I prefer PGP encrypted mail.                         http://www.mei.com

---

From: [email-masked] (Tom Gorski)
Date: 4 Apr 1995 13:24:54 GMT

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (John A. Stanley) writes:
>In article <[email-masked]>,
>[email-masked] (Stefan Hartmann) wrote:
>Oh, Jeez... not again. Ya know, some dude named Howard Johnson
>was issued a patent back in the 70's for a motor using only
>permanent magnets; nothing ever became of it. Gee, I wonder why.
>

Doesn't suprise me.  About a year ago a genuine US patent crossed my desk
for a "non-radial drive" motor.  Believe it or not, the idea was that the
rotor contained salients which had a slight dog-leg in the iron, such
that they weren't oriented radially from the shaft.  The idea was that
with this offset orientation, some of the reluctance force normal to the
air gap would be coupled into torque.  And it would work--for about 1/16 of a
turn, until the next salient goes KA-CHUNK! against the stator pole piece.

The inventor also failed to incorporate a flux return path in his stator,
and used wound coils for the stator field instead of putting the windings
into slots at the air gap.

In a way it is admirable that this particular inventor was undaunted by
an ignorance of basic machine theory, pursuing his vision to gain a US
patent.  But it also shows that the patent office is ignorant or uncaring
of the laws of physics when considering such inventions.

And no, using permanent magnets won't fix the problems here.  :-)
>--
>John A. Stanley                      [email-masked]

--Tom Gorski

---

From: "Andrew C. Plotkin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 12:42:04 -0400

> motor just via using Permanent Magnets !

(And more description, with an exclamation point at the end of every
single paragraph.)

You're a fool too.

--Z

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."

---

From: [email-masked] (John Kondis)
Date: 4 Apr 95 22:19:01 GMT

>> PM_Square: The new free energy generation device !
>> ==================================================

Hey!  What was wrong with the old one!?!  :-)

...John
    .   |     . |                      .     .   | |             |  .
___oooooOOOOooooOoooooooo_____________ooooooOOOOOOOOOoo______ooooOOooooo__
John Kondis        University of California, Irvine        [email-masked]
God made the bulk; surfaces were invented by the devil.  -- Wolfgang Pauli

---

From: [email-masked] (Dr. Christian Boettger)
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 06:29:00 +0100

In /cl/energie/alternativen kevin.jessup (Kevin Jessup)  uttered
> No need to pollute the space of the SCI newsgroups.
nor cl.energie.alternativen, I'd like to add. BTW: c.e.a is a german
newsgroup, so it's the wrong language in addition....

                    Christian
--
Dr. Christian Boettger:  work: [email-masked], [email-masked]
                        home: [email-masked], [email-masked]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PGP public key available as return receipt<<<<<<<<<<<<<