Unipolar Generator with MagVortechs LLC by Bryan Strohm

It is text of Bryan Strohm video on Unipolar Generator.
Alright. Um, a couple of alternative titles for this talk were, uh, “Pinch Me, Please, I Might Be Dreaming,” or “Welcome to the Rabbit Hole.” Okay. Um, it’s about myself, a little bit about my background so I don’t throw anybody off. I’m a, um, somewhat disposed member of the Ball family, of, uh, Muncie, Indiana. Uh, that’s Ball jars, Ball State University, and Ball Aerospace. Ball built three of the first five satellites the US ever put into orbit. Um, and for the purposes of my reality, I’m very happy that, um, they were not involved in any way in Operation Paperclip, which for those of you who might know something about that, um, makes me happy that they’re not. So, um, I also attended Rose-Hulman and majored in physics and mechanical engineering, with a minor in Russian. And, uh, I had a, well, I have to admit, I had an epiphany there about free energy, and it took me down a rabbit hole. Um, I went to a conference in Hanover, West Germany, in 1987, um, where I met, uh, it was the Hans Niper Free Energy Congress, and that entire convention was on free energy in Germany in the ’80s. There I met, uh, Adam Trombley, um, and he became my mentor for a number of years. Uh, Adam lately has been involved in the “Thrive” movie, if anyone’s seen that. Um, Adam had funding, uh, and he built a device around 1980. He was a protégé of Buckminster Fuller’s, and Buckminster Fuller turned him on to the unipolar generator. Uh, he built a device in 1980 that was shown to be 270% efficient. Now, you know, that’s a pretty wild claim, but it must have meant something because Adam later went on to give presentations about the technology to the US Congress and the US Senate. Uh, he was later gagged about the technology, but not because of its efficiency, but because he used a classified material in the device. It was developed by the Navy. Okay. I’ve got a little checklist here. I’ve got to keep going. Uh. Adam claimed that his device achieved over-unity when its solid metal rotor was saturated with current. Now, that means he’s pulling as much current as possible through a solid metal rotor. Um, and he also claimed that it was part of his field enclosure that made it over-unity, but I really don’t believe that. Um, so I started looking into what might happen when you saturate a solid metal rotor radially with current. Um, and I’ll have to explain what a unipolar generator is, and what a homopolar generator is, and the difference between the two. Okay. Homopolar generators have been used in industry for over a hundred years. Uh, there are patents on homopolar generators, hundreds of them at the patent office. Um, they typically have stacked discs that are placed in series to get the voltage up. Um, but the homopolar generator has a stator. It has a fixed field source and a rotor spinning in front of it, and that conforms more or less to textbook physics, that you have to have relative motion between an inductor and a field source. However, the unipolar generator, which was identified in the American Journal of Physics in 1955, by Crookes, states that you can attach the field source to the rotor and co-rotate the two, and it makes the same amount of power. Now, I have a device here that I can show that is an example of that and demonstrates exactly the difference between a homopolar generator and a unipolar generator. Now, I have to admit, I was a teenage RC hobbyist, so I use RC technology to drive my devices. And what we have here is a very large neodymium magnet driven by a motor over here, and we have a solid copper disc over here. Now, in this device, which spent about 3 years at Purdue University and eventually came back to me in pieces, demonstrates clearly that there is an analogy to the optical lens in the magnet. You see, when you look through a lens, you see an image on the other side, but if you rotate the lens on its axis of focus, obviously, the image does not rotate. Similarly, when you have a magnet and it’s going to spin on its axis of magnetization, the field does not rotate. So, a magnet is just like a lens looking down its axis of magnetization. So, in this device, we have our axial magnetic field, and we have our field source on one side and an inductor on the other side. Now, in this device, I have the measurements of voltage vision on the sides here. And if you fix, you can fix the magnet and spin the disc, you get your voltage over here across the radius. However, if you spin the magnet, you find that the magnet itself does indeed make a voltage. And, in fact, its voltage is higher than that of the disc. Uh, thus, the magnet’s internal field is higher than the field penetrating the copper disc adjacent to it. So, what we have is a fixed magnetic field, and we can generate a voltage radially in a disc as it spins in this field, independent, fully independent, of what the magnet does. So, the magnet can be fixed or counter-rotate or it can co-rotate, and you’re going to get the same voltage out of this disc. Um, now, I started looking at this, and looking at Adam Trombley’s device, and looking for an answer. How could you have such an anomalous device? I mean, even in the 1955 Crookes article, he’s saying that it’s a paradoxical experiment from 1851. That’s the title of his, uh, American Journal of Physics article, “A Paradoxical Experiment from 1851,” because Michael Faraday himself, somewhat experimented with this. It is loosely based on the Faraday disk. Um, but today, it can also be called an acyclic generator. And an acyclic generator simply means it has, uh, it’s a DC generator, and it’s straight-up DC. There’s no pulsing. There’s no variation in the voltage. It’s a perfectly linear voltage relative to RPM. Um, and for that reason and its high current capacity and low voltage, it’s great for a power source for heaters. Uh, so it’s been used in industry for over a hundred years. The industries being mostly metal smelting. The aluminum smelting industry uses this kind of generator. Typically they use a homopolar generator. Apparently, they’re not aware that you can co-rotate the two, uh, and it becomes more efficient. Um, but to say, if you co-rotate them, it’s a unipolar generator. If you have a fixed field source and you spin an inductor in front of it, it’s a homopolar generator. Okay. So, there’s a differentiation of terms, and there’s some confusion there. But I’m into the homopol- actually, homopolar and unipolar generators, and that’s what I eventually developed, a combination of the two. We’ll get to why I did that. Okay. I’d like to give a little background on electromagnetic induction on the dry-erase board and test my sketching skills here. Um, let me just make sure I’m at the right point here. There’s a lot to cover. Okay. All right. Okay. I’d like to talk about the non-linearity of electromagnetism. Um, we’re all somewhat familiar, or we should, you know, many of us are familiar with the fact that as electric magnetic radiation radiates outwards, it disperses according to the inverse square, actually inverse cube law, uh, as it gets away from its source. And that in itself is rather non-linear. It’s a cube function. Um, however, there’s some other things that most people don’t really recognize about the electric field. If you have a large sphere, imagine it’s a perfect sphere. And that’s it’s radiating
An electric field. A great question is, what’s the field inside the circle? What’s the field inside the sphere? And the answer is zero, everywhere. That’s a real stunner. At the surface of the sun, let’s say the sun is a charged particle; at the surface of the sun, it’s radiating all this energy outward, but on the inside of the sun, there’s zero net electric field. Okay. This has a correlation to gravity that I’d like to point out. I have a dry erase eraser here, just a second. Well, I thought I did. Uh, I might have used the wrong pen on there. Whoops. <noise> Oops, okay, sorry about that. All right. But my point is, in a gravitational system, hold on. Should I get the right things here? So, in an electric system, you have zero field anywhere inside the sphere. If you have, uh, in a gravitational system, however, you’re going to have a different kind of profile of the gravitational field inside the center of the Earth, let’s say. Okay. So, because what happens is, if you imagine yourself going to the center of the Earth, most of us have been taught that at the center of the Earth, the gravitational field is really intense, it’s really high, and all this matters down there, and there’s an intense gravitational field. It’s not true. Do a little thought experiment and take yourself to the center of the Earth, and where is all the mass that’s attracting you? Well, it’s all around you in all directions. There’s zero gravitational field at the center of the Earth. Even if not even considering electric field phenomenon, but if it’s just gravity as it described to us, there’s zero gravity at the center of the Earth. So you get a, you can chart from the outer edge of the sphere here to the center of the sphere, if you charge the electromagnetic field, it’s going to drop off like *boom*. And then you get past, you get past the edge of the Earth, and there’s going to be, I mean, if it’s electric, you’re going to get, you’re going to get zero field all the way to the center of the sphere. If it’s gravitational, you’re going to get a chart that looks something like this. These two differences in this would be a gravitational, uh, analogy. And this would be an electric analogy of the forces at the center of the Earth. Between these two forces, we should be able to determine pretty easily whether the Earth’s gravity is electric or gravitational as described by Einstein. And I just think that’s a very important point I’d like to throw in. As far as the non-linearity of electromagnetism. Another thing I’d like to point out really quick: in the center of an atom, if you have a proton and another proton, they’re going to repel each other at a distance. If you take those two repulsive protons and you push them together, push them together, what happens? Well, guess what: their electric fields merge. Their outer electric field here will merge with the outer electric field here, and as they get closer together, the outer fields will merge and they’ll overcome the repulsive force between the two and thrust themselves together. So here’s a model of the uh, atom, which explains thoroughly the strong nuclear force in terms of the electric field. Very simple. And the reason Einstein wouldn’t tell you this is because he had a security clearance. He worked for the government on the bomb. They weren’t going to tell anybody the truth, plain and simple. Okay. Onward. Hold on, I’ll check my notes. All right. Let’s get to Lenz’s law and look at that. I might misspell this. If I’ve misspelled some things, it’s because I’ve been out of academia for a little while, but I think uh, Lenz, an optical lens, L-E-N-Z. Well, that’s optical. What’s, but Lenz the man was L-E-N-Z, right? Lenz’s Law. Lenz’s law says, if you take a wire, say there’s your wire, and you’ve got a magnetic field, your B field, and you’re moving that wire perpendicular through that field, it creates a secondary field around the wire. And that secondary field repels the primary field. Well, why does it repel the primary field? My question there is, why? Why does, why is there back EMF? And the answer is, when you look at it analytically, you see that with the direction of the motion this way and the field, the secondary field here in front of the wire, wait a minute. Say there’s the wire. And there’s your direction of motion. In front of the wire, you get a repulsive magnetic field or a compression. In behind the wire, you get an attractive magnetic field. Field lines in parallel, in the right, in the same direction, or a suction. You can, you can completely uh, make an analogy that Lenz’s law works just like air resistance. Just like air resistance, in a magnetic field, you get a pressure in front of you and a suction behind you, but it’s magnetic. It’s not air pressure, but it works exactly the same. If you then take parallel wires with parallel currents, okay, and and we have our primary field here, we get a wrap around, and a wrap around, and a wrap around. Okay. Between the wires, you have a cancellation. But in front of the bundle of wires, you get this big uh, pressure or resistance. Now, it’s interesting because the the magnetic field, the resultant magnetic field, goes around the entire bundle of wires. So you get a big attraction on the back side and a big repulsion on the front. Now that’s interesting. So in theory, if you had a sheet of current, you’d have to go all the way to the beginning of the sheet to get that that resistance and all the way to the back of the sheet to get the suction. Let’s take a look at how this might apply to the unipolar generator, in particular to Adam’s device. Adam’s device has a big rotor and a radial current. He said when he’s pulling 15,000 amps out of his little 2 and 1/2 inch diameter rotor, he said he saturated it with current. That means it’s got a uniformly radial current path and a dense one. Well, if we look at these discrete elements of current inside the cylinder, we see that they’re not exactly quite, oops, excuse me, not exactly quite parallel. Of course, they’re divergent a little bit. But what’s going to happen? Well, what’s that secondary field going to look like? The secondary field is going to go around the top of the disc on one side in one direction, and around the bottom of the disc, the other side in the other direction. So, wait a minute. That means he’s taken parallel, he’s taken parallel lines of current and he’s pulled them apart, and wrapped them around, and he’s taken the leading edge of the wire bundle and attached it to the trailing edge of the wire bundle. Canceling Lenz’s law, canceling the reduction, canceling the force, the back EMF force that stops all other generators. Is this really possible? I mean, you know, I’m looking at this going, Really? You know. And and furthermore, here we have a model of the Earth itself. The Earth itself is a spinning magnet, spinning on its axis of magnetization in the presence of its own field. It’s got a radial current flow in all directions.

Accelerate, and if it does accelerate, it could have a really high torque – not a little torque, a very high torque. Because, second, if you’re pulling, let’s say, I’m trying to design a machine that’ll carry 100 amps continuously. My goal is to build a machine this big, or maybe even smaller, you know, feasibly, that could produce 100 amps continuously at 6 to 12 volts DC. This machine could replace a car battery in terms of power, electrical output power, but it would never run out of power. And if you pull – so if you pull that 100 amps off there – you’ve got a powerful secondary field. If you’ve got tangential attraction between your discs all the way around, man, you could have, you’re talking foot-pounds of torque out of this that could be dozens or hundreds of foot-pounds of torque out of this machine while producing electricity at over 100%. This is not just, this isn’t a toy anymore. We’re going to build something that could really possibly change things. That’s why I’ve invested so much time and so much money in this because we need to get there. What are you thinking of making your rollers out of? Did you get that in mind? Yeah, I uh… Well, there’s a number of new materials possibly for the rollers. Um, most brush systems are made out of carbon and copper impregnated carbon.