This reply is only geared towards the comment regarding the energy it
takes to magnetize with respect to permeability. I will respond to
the excess MCE energy later:

It is a misnomer that it takes half the energy to generate the same
magnetic field within a mat'l of twice the permeability. Lets first
use a coil/core as an example. The greater the permeability of the
core, the higher the inductance of the system. The higher the
inductance, the more voltage is required to generate the same
magnetic field, albeit with proportionally less current. The energy
consumed by the coil is the same regardless of the core permeability.

Another way to look at it is to identify the force it takes to detach
a magnet from a piece of magnetic mat'l. The energy inside the
magnetic mat'l due to the magnetizing field is equal to the energy it
will take to seperate the magnet from the mat'l over a distance until
the force of attraction equals zero. This energy rises with
permeability, because the force vs distance increases in proportion
to the permeability.

I would like to stress that if permeability increases, it takes the
SAME amount of energy to generate the same field within a mat'l of
the same dimensions.

Now regarding specific heat, what mat'ls show a rise in Cp under
influence of a magnetic field? Because I would be inclined to think
that they cool, instead of heat.

--- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, "softwarelabus"
<softwarelabus@...> wrote:
>
> Hi richar18,
>
> There are several methods. Method #1 is the easiest. Normally MCE
> (magnetocaloric effect) heats up, cools down, etc. In electrical
> conductors such as iron and Metglas a lot of the MCE energy goes to
> micro eddy current bursts. Normally the eddy currents dissipate all
> the energy in the form of heat. If you pulse the core at the correct
> speed you will get a _coherent_ avalanche pulse. IOW, the avalanches
> are occurring at roughly the same time. You'll get eddy currents.
When
> the Eddy currents reach peak then your receiving coil will attempt
to
> rob as much energy from the Eddy currents. You do this by placing a
> load across the coil.
>
> Picture a nano size group of atoms that flip. There are many factors
> that determine the flip rate such as magnetic field strength, but
free
> electrons plays a huge role. The free electrons act as inductance,
> resist the flipping magnetic moments. (You can see this effect by
> dropping a neo magnet down a hollow Al tube.) This gives a micro
eddy
> burst. So you could say its like a microscopic coil around the
> avalanche, which is a good thing so as to collect a high percentage
of
> the MCE energy.
>
> Under normal conditions you have millions of micro eddy currents
that
> are simultaneously increasing and decreasing all over the place
within
> the core. In other words, the bursts are not coherent. Micro eddy
> bursts do not last very long, which is why you need to pulse the
core
> fast enough and then quickly absorb some energy from the eddy
> currents. Although, when the eddy currents occur at the same time
then
> the bursts decay at a much slower rate, which is a good thing.
>
> Where the energy comes from is fascinating. Without ambient
> temperature (vibrating atoms) magnetic material would align
(saturate)
> and that's the end of the story. Even when you remove the applied
> field the core would remain magnetized. It is vibrating atoms that
> give low coercivity. So when you remove the applied field it is the
> atoms that _force_ the magnetic moments to break alignment with the
> net magnetic field. That requires energy, which is exactly why
> magnetic materials cool down when the applied field is removed. That
> is where MCE energy comes from. Even the NASA guy who contacted me
agreed.
>
>
> Trying to compute the energy relative to the field strength is
perhaps
> not the correct method. Consider two PM's each on swivels, so they
can
> rotate. The PM's are rotated so they repel each other. The magnetic
> fields cancel each other, so the net magnetic field is relatively
low,
> just within close proximity of each PM. Now allow the PM's to
quickly
> rotate so they align. You get energy _plus_ you get a net magnetic
> field, lol. Magnetic moments also rotate as IBM's experiments
> revealed. Normally this flip/rotation rate takes a few nanoseconds,
> but in electrically conductive materials such as iron and metglas it
> takes many microseconds.
>
> Regards,
> Paul Lowrance
>
>
> --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, "richar18" <richar18@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Paul, interesting stuff. In looking into it a little further,
I
> > also see that Harold Aspden mentions the magnetocaloric effect as
a
> > part of his work. It seems to have some merit; I calculated the
> > energy stored in a hypothetical 1 cubic meter specimen of iron
evenly
> > permeated with a 1 tesla magnetic flux, and compared that with
the
> > energy generated as heat during a 1k temp rise. The energy
generated
> > as heat is almost 9 times that stored in the magnetic field.
Seems
> > like a sort of heat engine, where cop > 1 does not violate the
1st
> > law of Thermodynamics. Can you explain again the mechanism that
> > allows you to tap this excess heat as electrical energy? I did
not
> > quite undersatnd the Wiki article in this respect.
> >
> > --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, "softwarelabus"
> > <softwarelabus@> wrote:
> > >
> > > @All
> > > I have strong evidence that non-electrical magnetic cores will
not
> > > exhibit the "free energy." Therefore most ferrite cores will
not
> > > work. Iron powder core is another story. You want
nanocrystalline
> > and
> > > amorphous magnetic material. Please study my wiki, albeit it is
> > > presently a quick job -->
> > >
> > > http://peswiki.com/index.php/Site:MEMM
> > >
> > > You will note that both Naudin's silicon iron and Metglas
versions
> > use
> > > Method #1, which relies on Eddy currents as a tool of capturing
MCE
> > > energy. This information is not based on unproven theories.
Rather,
> > > it is a recent discovery based on very well known conventional
> > > physics. In the above wiki there two examples which go through
> > > extreme details in a step-by-step process explaining exactly
what is
> > > happening within the magnetic material on an atomic scale.
> > >
> > > Nanocrystalline material possesses huge internal energy
exchanges.
> > For
> > > example, a study by Skorvánek and Kovác shows that
nanocrystalline
> > > material well below Curie temperature has roughly one fourth
MCE as
> > Gd
> > > alloys. For example, one cubic inch of good nanocrystalline
material
> > > toroid core oscillating at 100 KHz with an applied field to
generate
> > > internal 1 T-peak fields produces over 15 million joules in one
> > > second, which is over 15 megawatts! The amount of power
required to
> > > generate an oscillating 1 T-peak 100 KHz field within such
material
> > is
> > > but a fraction of a watt. In other words, it requires but a
> > fraction
> > > of a watt to produce megawatts of power exchanged within the
> > > nanocrystalline magnetic core material.
> > >
> > > There are several problems here. The main problem being that
> > magnetic
> > > material is very effective in absorbing MCE energy. Another
issue is
> > > in choosing material. Nanocrystalline may exibit megawatts as
in the
> > > above example as compared to a few hundred watts in typicall
iron
> > > cores. Trying to capture but an infintesimal amount of that MCE
> > energy
> > > is difficult enough in nanocrystalline material. Therefore such
> > > attempts with large domain materials such as typical iron is
> > extremely
> > > difficult. The good news is there are various techniques to
overcome
> > > this, as detailed in my wiki.
> > >
> > > What is very interesting is that while pacing in the backyard
one
> > late
> > > night I designed a machine entirely based on my MCE theory. I
stood
> > > back looking at the design and said, "Hey, that's the MEG!!!"
> > >
> > > I studied one of Naudin's silicon iron versions and discovered
> > Naudin
> > > incorrectly interpreted his scope. After painstakingly
analyzing the
> > > scope pictures, counting the power over time pixel by pixel I
> > > concluded that it was not generating "free energy." Then I
went to
> > > his Metglas version and without doubt it generates "free
energy."
> > > Naudin supplies sufficient information to easily conclude that
> > either
> > > he falsified the scope pictures or his scope is terribly
> > > malfunctioning or it generates free energy. It is unfortunate
so
> > many
> > > other people at other sites have published false science
regarding
> > > Naudin's results. I debated with one such key person in private
PM
> > > about this and he concluded that I was correct; i.e., you cannot
> > > dispute the scope pictures. The odds of Naudin's scope to
> > > malfunctioning in such a manner is slim and none. In other
words, if
> > > we apply 50 KHz sine wave signal in addition to a 400 MHz
signal on
> > > say a 20 MHz scope then the scope will simply dampen out the
400 MHz
> > > signal without affecting the 50 KHz signal unless the 400 MHz
signal
> > > was intense enough to saturate. If that's the case then knowing
my
> > > physics we have a 400 MHz signal that radiates outrageous
amounts of
> > > energy.
> > >
> > > In a nutshell, Naudin's silicon iron version I analyzed did not
> > > exhibit "free energy," but the Metglas version did.
> > >
> > > Hopefully sometime soon the first fully and freely
> > published "smoking
> > > gun", self-running, closed loop "free energy" machine will be
> > released
> > > with extreme building instructions. See the overunity.com links
at
> > the
> > > bottom of my peswiki page for further details about the release
> > > process. The goal has been early 2007, but I could not be more
> > pleased
> > > if someone completed this before 2007. The goal is not about
> > > self-profiting, but about helping this world. What will be a
great
> > day!
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Paul Lowrance
> > >
> >
>