Time: Wed Jul 09 16:30:35 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA15010;
	Wed, 9 Jul 1997 16:26:58 -0700 (MST)
	by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA00345;
	Wed, 9 Jul 1997 16:26:22 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 16:26:15 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: JOSEPH NEWMAN'S THEORY By Roger Hastings PhD (fwd)

>           JOSEPH NEWMAN'S THEORY By Roger Hastings PhD
>              Transcribed By George W. Dahlberg P.E.
>I do not intend to recapitulate the theory presented in Newman's book, but
>rather to briefly provide my interpretation of his ideas.  Newman began
>studying electricity and magnetism in the mid 1960's.  He has a mechanical
>background, and was looking for a mechanical description of electromagnetic
>fields.  That is, he assumed that there must be a mechanical interaction
>between, for example, two magnets.  He could not find such a description in
>any book, and decided that he would have to provide his own explanation.
>He came to the conclusion that if electromagnetic fields consisted of tiny
>spinning particles moving at the speed of light along the field lines, then
>he could explain all standard electromagnetic phenomena through the
>interaction of spinning particles.  Since the spinning particles interact
>in the same way as gyroscopes, he called the particles gyroscopic
>particles.  In my opinion, such spinning particles do provide a qualitative
>description of electromagnetic phenomena, and his model is useful in
>understanding complex electrical situations (note that without a pictorial
>model one must rely solely upon mathematical equations which can become
>extremely complex).
>Given that electromagnetic fields consist of matter in motion, or kinetic
>energy, Joe decided that it should be possible to tap this kinetic energy.
>He likes to say:  "How long did man sit next to a stream before he invented
>the paddle wheel?"  Joe built a variety of unusual devices to tap the
>kinetic energy in electromagnetic fields before he arrived at his present
>motor design.  He likes to point out that both Maxwell and Faraday, the
>pioneers of electromagnetism, believed that the fields consisted of matter
>in motion.  This is stated in no uncertain terms in Maxwell's book "A
>Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field".  In fact, Maxwell used a
>dynamical model to derive his famous equations.  This fact has all but been
>lost in current books on electromagnetic theory.  The quantity which
>Maxwell called "electromagnetic momentum" is now referred to as the "vector
>Going further, Joe realized that when a magnetic field is created, its
>gyroscopic particles must come from the atoms of the materials which
>created the field.  Thus he decided that all matter must consist of the
>same gyroscopic particles.  For example, when a voltage is applied to a
>wire, Newman pictures gyroscopic particles (which I will call gyrotons for
>short) moving down the wire at the speed of light.  These gyrotons line up
>the electrons in the wire.  The electrons themselves consist of a swirling
>mass of gyrotrons, and their matter fields combine when lined up to form
>the magnetic lines of force circulating around the wire.  In this process,
>the wire has literally lost some of its mass to the magnetic field, and
>this is accounted for by Einstein's equation of energy equals mass times
>the square of the speed of light.  According to Einstein, every conversion
>of energy involves a corresponding conversion of matter.  According to
>Newman, this may be interpreted as an exchange of gyrotrons.  For example,
>if two atoms combine to give off light, the atoms would weight slightly
>less after the reaction than before.  According to Newman, the atoms have
>combined and given off some of their gyrotrons in the form of light.  Thus
>Einstein's equation is interpreted as a matter of counting gyrotrons.
>These particles cannot be created or destroyed in Newman's theory, and they
>always move at the speed of light.
>My interpretation of Newman's original idea for his motor is as follows.
>As a thought experiment, suppose one made a coil consisting of 186,000
>miles of wire.  An electrical field would require one second to travel the
>length of the wire, or in Newman's language, it would take one second for
>gyrotons inserted at one end of the wire to reach the other end.  Now
>suppose that the polarity of the applied voltage was switched before the
>one second has elapsed, and this polarity switching was repeated with a
>period less than one second.  Gyrotons would become trapped in the wire, as
>their number increased, so would the alignment of electrons and the number
>of gyrotons in the magnetic field increase.  The intensified magnetic field
>could be used to do work on an external magnet, while the input current to
>the coil would be small or non-existent.  Newman's motors contain up to 55
>miles of wire, and the voltage is rapidly switched as the magnet rotates.
>He elaborates upon his theory in his book, and uses it to interpret a
>variety of physical phenomena.
>Joseph Newman demonstrated one of his motor prototypes in Washington, D.C..
>The motor consisted of a large coil wound as a solenoid, with a large
>magnet rotating within the bore of the solenoid.  Power was supplied by a
>bank of six volt lantern batteries.  The battery voltage was switched to
>the coil through a commutator mounted on the shaft of the rotating magnet.
>The commutator switched the polarity of the voltage across the coil each
>half cycle to keep a positive torque on the rotating magnet.  In addition,
>the commutator was designed to break and remake the voltage contact about
>30 times per cycle.  Thus the voltage to the coil was pulsed.  The speed of
>the magnet rotation was adjusted by covering up portions of the commutator
>so that pulsed voltage was applied for a fraction of a cycle.  Two speeds
>were demonstrated:  12 R.P.M. for which 12 pulses occurred each revolution;
>and 120 rpm for which all commutator segments were firing.  The slower
>speed was used to provide clear oscilloscope pictures of currents and
>voltages.  The fast speed was used to demonstrate the potential power of
>the motor.  Energy outputs consisted of incandescent bulbs in series with
>the batteries, fluorescent tubes across the coil, and a fan powered by a
>belt attached to the shaft of the rotor.  Relevant motor parameters are
>given below:
>  Coil weight    :  9000 lbs.
>  Coil length    :  55 miles of copper wire
>  Coil Inductance:  1,100 Henries measured by observing the current
>                    rise time when a D.C. voltage was applied.
>  Coil resistance:  770 Ohms
>  Coil Height    :  about 4 ft.
>  Coil Diameter  :  slightly over 4 ft. I.D.
>  Magnet weight  :  700 lbs.
>  Magnet Radius  :  2 feet
>  Magnet geometry:  cylinder rotating about its perpendicular axis
>  Magnet  Moment of Inertia:  40 kg-sq.m. (M.K.S.) computed as one
>                              third mass times radius squared
>  Battery Voltage:  590 volts under load
>  Battery Type   :  Six volt Ray-O-Vac lantern batteries  connected
>                    in series
>A brief description of the measurements taken and distributed at the press
>conference follows.  When the motor was rotating at 12 rpm, the average
>D.C. input current from the batteries was about 2 milli-amps, and the
>average battery input was then 1.2 watts.  The back current (flowing
>against the direction of battery current) was about -55 milli-amps, for an
>average charging power of -32 watts.  The forward and reverse current were
>clearly observable on the oscilloscope.  It was noted that when the reverse
>current flowed, the battery voltage rose above its ambient value, verifying
>that the batteries were charging.  The magnitude of the charging current
>was verified by heating water with a resistor connected in series with the
>batteries.  A net charging power was the primary evidence used to show that
>the motor was generating energy internally, however output power was also
>observed.  The 55 m-amp current flowing in the 770 ohm coil generates 2.3
>watts of heat, which is in excess of the input power.  In addition, the
>lights were blinking brightly as the coil was switched.
>The back current from the coil switched from zero to negative several amps
>in about 1 milli-second, and then decayed to zero in about 0.1 second.
>Given the coil inductance of 1100 henries, the switching voltages were
>several million volts.  Curiously, the back current did not switch on
>smoothly, but increased in a staircase.  Each step in the staircase
>corresponded to an extremely fast switching of current, with each increase
>in the current larger than the previous increase.  The width of the stairs
>was about 100 micro-seconds, which for reference is about one third of the
>travel time of light through the 55 mile coil.
>Mechanical losses in the rotor were measured as follows:  The rotor was
>spun up by hand with the coil open circuited.  An inductive pick-up loop
>was attached to a chart recorder to measure the rate of decay of the rotor.
>The energy stored in the rotor (one half the moment of inertia times the
>square of the angular velocity) was plotted as a function of time.  The
>slope of this curve was measured at various times and gave the power loss
>in the rotor as a function of rotor speed.  The result of these
>measurements is given in the following table:
>            Rotor Speed       Power Dissipation    Power/(Speed Squared)
>            radian/sec             watts           watts/(rad/sec)^2
>                 4.0                6.3             0.39
>                 3.7                5.8             0.42
>                 3.3                5.0             0.46
>                 3.0                3.5             0.39
>                 2.1                2.0             0.45
>                 1.7                1.2             0.42
>                 1.2                0.7             0.47
>The data is consistent with power loss proportional to the square of the
>angular speed, as would be expected at low speeds.  When the rotor moves
>fast enough so that air resistance is important, the losses would begin to
>increase as the cube of the angular speed.  Using power = 0.43 times the
>square of the angular speed will give a lower bound on mechanical power
>dissipation at all speeds.  When the rotor is moving at 12 rpm, or 1.3
>rad/sec, the mechanical loss is 0.7 watts.
>When the rotor was sped up to 120 rpm by allowing the commutator to fire on
>all segments, the results were quite dramatic.  The lights were blinking
>rapidly and brightly, and the fan was turning rapidly.  The back current
>spikes were about ten amps, and still increased in a staircase, with the
>width of the stairs still about 100 micro-seconds.  Accurate measurements
>of the input current were not obtained at that time, however I will report
>measurements communicated to me by Mr. Newman.  At a rotation rate of 200
>rpm (corresponding to mechanical losses of at least 190 watts), the input
>power was about 6 watts.  The back current in this test was about 0.5 amps,
>corresponding to heating in the coil of 190 watts.  As a final point of
>interest, note that the Q of his coil at 200 rpm is about 30.  If his
>battery plus commutator is considered as an A.C. power source, then the
>impedance of the coil at 200 rpm is 23,000 henries, and the power factor is
>0.03.  In this light, the predicted input power at 700 volts is less than
>one watt!
>Since I am preparing this document on my home computer, it will be
>convenient to use the Basic computer language to write down formulas.  The
>notation is * for multiply, / for divide, ^ for raising to a power, and I
>will use -dot to represent a derivative.  Newton's second law of motion
>applied to Newman's rotor yields the following equation:
>            MI*TH-dot-dot + G*TH-dot = K*I*SIN(TH)      (1)
>       where     MI = rotor moment of inertia
>                 TH = rotor angular position (radians)
>                  G = rotor decay constant
>                  K = torque coupling constant
>                  I = coil current
>In general the constant G may depend upon rotor speed, as when air
>resistance becomes important.  The term on the right hand side of the
>equation represents the torque delivered to the rotor when current flows
>through the coil.  A constant friction term was found through measurement
>to be small compared to the TH-dot term at reasonable speeds, but can be
>included in the "constant" G.  The equation for the current in the coil is
>given by:
>            L*I-dot + R*I = V(TH) - K*(TH-dot)*SIN(TH)      (2)
>       where          L = coil inductance
>                      I = coil current
>                      R = coil resistance
>                      V(TH) = voltage applied to coil by the
>                              commutator which is a function
>                              of the angle TH
>                      K = rotor induction constant
>In general, the resistance R is a function of voltage, particularly during
>commutator switching when the air resistance breaks down creating a spark.
>Note that the constant K is the same in equations (1) and (2).  This is
>required by energy conservation as discussed below.  To examine energy
>considerations, multiply Equation (1) by TH-dot, and Equation (2) by I.
>Note that the last term in each equation is then identical if the K's are
>the same.  Eliminating the last term between the two equations yields the
>instantaneous conservation law:
>       I*V=R*I^2 + G*(TH-dot)^2 + .5*L*(I^2)-dot + .5*MI*((TH-dot)^2)-dot
>If this equation is averaged over one cycle of the rotor, then the last two
>terms vanish when steady state conditions are reached (i.e. when the
>current and speed repeat their values at angular positions which are
>separated by 360 degrees).  Denoting averages by < >, the above equation
>            <IV> = <R*I^2> + <G*(TH-dot)^2>         (3)
>This result is entirely general, independent of any dependencies of R and G
>on other quantities.  The term on the left represents the input power.  The
>first term on the right is the power dissipated in the coil, and the second
>term is the power delivered to the rotor.  The efficiency, defined as power
>delivered to the rotor divided by input power is thus always less than one
>by Equation (3).  This result does require, however, that the constants K
>in equation (1) and equation (2) are identical.  If the constant K in
>equation (2) is smaller than the constant K appearing in equation (1), then
>it may be verified that the efficiency can mathematically be larger than
>What do the constants, K, mean?  In the first equation, we have the torque
>delivered to the magnet, while in the second equation we have the back
>inductance or reaction of the magnet upon the coil.  The equality of the
>constants is an expression of Newton's third law.  How could the constants
>be unequal?  Consider the sequence of events which occur during the firing
>of the commutator.  First the contact breaks, and the magnetic field in the
>coil collapses, creating a huge forward spike of current through the coil
>and battery.  This current spike provides an impulsive torque to the rotor.
>The rotor accelerates, and the acceleration produces a changing magnetic
>field which propagates through the coil, creating the back EMF.  Suppose
>that the commutator contacts have separated sufficiently when the last
>event occurs to prevent the back current from flowing to the battery.  Then
>the back reaction is effectively smaller than the forward impulsive torque
>on the rotor.  This suggestion invokes the finite propagation time of the
>electromagnetic fields, which has not been included in Equations (1) and
>A continued mathematical modeling of the Newman motor should include the
>effects of finite propagation time, particularly in his extraordinary long
>coil of wire.  I have solved Equations (1) and (2) numerically, and note
>that the solutions require finer and finer step size as the inductance,
>moment of inertia, and magnet strength are increased to large values.  The
>solutions break down such that the motor "takes off" in the computer, and
>this may indicate instabilities, which could be mediated in practice by
>external perturbations.  I am confident that Maxwell's equations , with the
>proper electro-mechanical coupling, can provide an explanation to the
>phenomena observed in the Newman device.  The electro-mechanical coupling
>may be embedded in the Maxwell equations if a unified picture (such as
>Newman's picture of gyroscopic particles) is adopted.
>Roger Hastings, PhD
>Principal Physicist, Unisys Corp.
>Former Associate Professor of Physics
>North Dakota State University
>Evan Soule'
>(504) 524-3063
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>->  Posted by: josephnewman@earthlink.net (Evan Soule)

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail