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)
<snip>
>
> 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
>potential".
>
>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.
>
>DATA ON THE NEWMAN MOTOR
>
>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!
>
>MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF NEWMAN'S MOTOR
>
>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
>becomes:
>
> <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
>unity.
>
>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
>(2).
>
>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'
>josephnewman@earthlink.net
>(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