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**