On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:13:13 -0700 (PDT), Half-Nutz
wrote:

On Mar 17, 11:14*am, "Phil Kangas" wrote:
Yah, this guy claims to have invented a new form of
generator and claims it is not a perpetual motion
device! I'm a skeptic but here is the link so you
can decide for yourself. I'm going to keep my wallet
in my pocket......phil

http://www.nullgrav.com/index.htm

--
The right of the people to keep and bear
arms shall not be infringed.

This looks to be a variation of the Farady Disk generator.
This was discovered, and promptly ignored, about 150 years ago.

It is a very strange phenomenon, and easy to really get tangled up in
the implications of it.

Basically, all common generators, and motors, use a rotor and a
stator. The electrical load currents will create an opposing magnetic
force between the rotor and the stator.
That is why a genreator takes more power as you load it heavier.

The Farady Disk, aka homopolar generator, aka acyclical generator, aka
space machine etc. does not have a rotor, and a stator. Only a rotor.
That's right, only a rotor. The whole things works "sideways" to how
you always thought a generator should work.
It is Very confusing to think about, since adding a load to the
generator cannot create a torque reaction in the conventional way we
all understand generators to work. Note 1.

I won't presume to know how we all "conventionally understand"
generators to work... but if you examine Faraday's sketch
thoughtfully, you will see that radial current in the disc (in the
presence of the axial B-field) will indeed produce countertorque, and
an opposite torque will act upon the radial lead to the center. The
confusion arises because these torques are so small compared to the
residual losses in such systems that they are easily overlooked.

In the Sunburst experiment, residual losses were relatively enormous
when the thing was generating no power at all, and losses did increase
when power was drawn.