To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

Storing Cookies (See : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?  (Read 48028 times)

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2015, 11:42:05 PM »
Another dissident scientist whose experiments did not agree with Maxwell equation whas Stefan Marinov. His death is covered by mistery. He felt down from a staircase in a building, some people say it was a  suicide , others that he was murdered because he was about to release his free energy findings. As no magazine wanted to publish his work, he finally decided to publish it into New Scientist (1986) into the advertisement section. I think he was friend of Gennady Nikolaev.

I want to create in this thread a repository with all the theories that suggest that Maxwell equations are not complete.


Offline sadang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2015, 08:05:41 AM »
Stefan Marinov was the most recent scientist who dared to risk his professional and social status in his trying to pass the inquisitorial per-review method which reject what don't fit in the bible of the current scientific dogma.

Bellow are two articles of Marinov; first is the main important public article written in 1996, and the second is about the displacement current, both related to current electromagnetic theory and the nowadays wrong implemented and promoted Maxwell's equations.

And it should be recalled here that Stefan Marinov was the only one (at least according to my knowledge) who managed to replicate the Testatika energy generator.

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2015, 12:55:38 PM »
Thank you for the great info Sadang. Yesterday I was searching for a site where I could read in text format the article Annus Horribilis by Stefan Marinov in Nature as an advertisement ( for easy reading). It is full of interesting info. For me it is clear that our current Maxwell theory is not complete, it is just the tip of the iceberg:

I attach also this page in pdf format

Offline sadang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2015, 02:27:29 PM »
It was my pleasure to post on your topic. And thanks for article of Nikolaev. I know about that site for many years. Marinov has many other extremely valuable articles and books, that emphasize many gaps in the current scientific paradigm. Of course there are many others, but with not a so higher importance as of him. Let's place in this topic only articles related to Maxwell's system of equations and electromagnetism.

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2015, 02:47:54 PM »
Sadang, if you are interested you should watch some videos from Distinti about his findings and theory of EM. He also propose a modifi ation to Maxwell equations with some longitudinal component. This video is pure genius, but he has some more videos in his channel, one discrediting also the displacement currents:

I think he could be in the right path

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2015, 05:04:00 PM »
Hi all,

I have found a book from Nikolaev (2003) with his EM theory. I found it in russian so I have used Google translator to get this english version, that I attach in pdf. Book: Gennady Nikolaev - Modern electrodynamics and the causes of its paradoxical nature. Theories, Experiments, Paradoxes - 2003

It is curious but in some sites this books include a foreword by Stefan Marinov that I suppose that Nikolaev added to his book. I copy here the foreword by Marinov:

FOREWORD ( by Stefan Marinov ) (used by Nikolaev in his book)
(Source of the Foreword: )

We will not argue, we calculate ...
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
... and measure.
Gennady Nikolaev

Gennady Nikolayev and I met at the II International Conference on space, time
and gravity in St. Petersburg in September 1991, but some of his most
interesting preprints I read a quarter of a century ago, when I lived in Bulgaria.
During the conference, we spent more time in my room at the "Leningrad" than
in the conference room, for spent Nikolaev and some other Russian physicists
experiments, which he told me were a hundred times more interesting than the
reports at the conference.
Any physics student, faced with electromagnetism, notes that there is
"something wrong", but under the influence of authority of textbooks and
professors every student tries any contradictions and absurdities "sweep under
the carpet," as all the authors of textbooks and all the professors did the same
as when they themselves were students.
My "ferment" lasted much longer, and under the influence of remarkable
experiments on electromagnetic induction Cuban physicist Francisco Muller and
my own on the measurement of the absolute velocity of the Earth, rejects the
principle of relativity and equivalence, I began to finally tempered
ikonoklastom. But I must say that, although I have several times refused the
Lorenz equations, Grassmann and again raised his flag on it, by 1991, this
equation was I firmly accepted as true.
And Nikolaev experiments showed me that in no way could be linked to the
Lorentz equation (Grassmann name will be omitted). I literally lost sleep and
rest and Nikolayev said: "Gennady, I built the whole" my "electromagnetism on
the Lorenz equations, I was able to bring his impeccable logic of mathematical
equations Coulomb and Neumann on electric and magnetic energy of two
charges, and now you show up with their experiments that they say, This
equation is not true! That restructuring, which started you in your kingdom-state,
is nothing compared the restructuring, which you cause in electromagnetism. I
find it hard to reshape my books: I'm old, I'm tired. " Nikolaev said, "The sooner
you rebuilt, the easier it will attain salvation. Do not rebuilt - do not you will be
saved!" And, back in Graz, I began to "rebuild". Again felt again the derivation of
formulas, compared with experiments. Then he repeated some of the
experiments Nicholas. The effects were the same as that described Nikolaev in
his monograph in 1986, tapped on a typewriter, which he kindly gave me. This
monograph for an improved form of the reader holds in his hands now.
Thus, the equation of Lorentz "bursting at the seams." A cylindrical magnet that
axial plane cut in half, and one half is inverted (magnetic forces make it
inverting yourself) creates a cutting plane near the magnetic field which acts on
the current longitudinal forces (according to the equation of Lorentz force, which
acts on the magnet currents always perpendicular to the latter). This field
Nikolaev called scalar magnetic field, and the above-described magnet in honor
of Siberian Nikolayev I called Siberian KOLYA (SIBERIAN COLIU - give its
English transcription, because the magnet is much more known in English
literature than in Russian). It turned out, it means: for two hundred years of
electromagnetism mankind has not noticed that, besides the magnetic field B,
which we call the vector magnetic field, there is a scalar magnetic field S. So at
the current element Idr are two forces, Lorentz and Nikolaev.

F = F_lor + F_nik = Idr x B / c + Idr S / c .

But the most interesting result, which is the scalar magnetic field is as
follows. Everyone knows that when using the first three fingers of the right hand
can be shown that if a piece of wire with sliding contacts at its ends to move in a
plane perpendicular to the magnetic field vector B in the direction perpendicular
to the wire, the current is induced in such a direction that interaction of this field
with the induced current in the leads to the inhibition of the wire. This is a wellknown
law of Lenz, the first term in the above formula gives its mathematical
justification. If, however, with only one finger right or left hand reader will try to
establish which will induce a current in a wire with sliding contacts, which he will
move in the direction of the wire in a magnetic field with a scalar S, then, to my
amazement, the reader will find that the induced current will not slow down the
movement of the wire, and will help her move. This can be called antilents
effect. Of this effect, which the reader can immediately be verified
experimentally, if at hand magnet SIBERIAN Kolya, it follows that using scalar
magnetic field can build perpetual motion. I think this will be enough to become
clear to the reader what to do Gennady Nikolayev in electromagnetism.
Express the vector magnetic field B through the electric charges q i Vi
their speed and distance from the observation point Ti is very easy, if
you enter the vector magnetic potential A, for

B = rotA = rot Sum(qi·vi/cri)

But express S in terms of qi, Vj and rj was not so easy. The formula for S, which
I proposed and which to this day has not entered into conflict with any of the
experiments I know where there is a longitudinal movement of a piece of wire or
induction currents in the longitudinal motion piece of wire, the following:

S = -divA - Sum( (qi·vi·n)(ri·n)/cri^3 )

where n = dr / dr - unit vector in the direction of the current element Idr. It is
possible that this formula should take a factor of "1/2". All I know of experiments
on longitudinal movement of the wire, including my own, are of good quality,
and yet the presence or absence of the coefficient "1/2" is not set.
I should note that the first who observed at the beginning of the century the
longitudinal motion of a piece of wire with sliding contacts, is an American
engineer Carl Hering. These effects are described in his review article in the
American Journal TRANS. AM. INST. EL.ENG., 42, 311 (1923), which I
reprinted in my journal DEUTSCHE PHYSIK, 1 (3), 41 (1992).
The last three years of my experimental and theoretical work, in addition to
efforts to launch a perpetual motion magnet SIBERIAN Kolya, were devoted to
the correct conclusion of the fundamental equations of electromagnetism, which
should replace the wrong Lorentz equation. The first equation, which I proposed
and named in honor of Nikolayev Mykolaiv equation that already contains a
scalar field S in the above form. I sent this equation Nikolaev. He spoke
critically. Taking into account the guidance of the "leader", I suggested a new
equation is called the second equation of Nikolaev. Nikolaev with this equation
as if agreed, but wrote me in a letter that equation, I suggest, should be called
by its name. Soon I will put experiments (see. DEUTSCHE PHYSIK, 3 (11), 5
(1994)), which is in contradiction with the first and second equations Nikolaev
(these names I keep to this day, because once the baby is named Ivan, the can
not be when he's a year old, began to call him Peter). Then, in late 1993, I
proposed a new equation that described by the Marinov equation. It was a
beautiful elegant equation is simple symmetrization was obtained from the
equation Grassmann, ie from the Lorenz equations, and three years I thought
this equation, all effects due to the scalar magnetic field S, which is equal to the
above value, multiplied by a factor of "1/2".The journal DEUTSCHE PHYSIK
reader will find accurate calculation of the scalar magnetic field generated by an
infinitely long cylinder and ring magnets SIBERIAN Kolya, which are the basic
elements of perpetual motion machines working on the scalar magnetic field.
But a month ago, I set up an experiment, which is in contradiction with the
Marinov equation, because this equation, in addition to the vector magnetic field
B, input, and other vector magnetic field B Mar , which in the experiments were
Since the question of what should be the fundamental equation in
electromagnetism, is a matter of great importance and since I was unable to
find this equation, I announced a contest with a prize of $ 100 000. This contest
will be announced in the near future in the American Journal GALILEAN
Conditions of competition are as follows:
I pay $ 100 000 to the researcher, who will offer the formula (usually scheme),
with whose help it will be possible to count the power and torque (with respect
to an arbitrary axis) that closed circuit with a current I i acts on the other closed
loop with current I or on the side of the latter, associated with the sliding
contacts rest. The money will be paid, if I'm not able to demonstrate an
experiment that would enter into conflict with this formula. If the applicant does
not agree that my "kontreksperiment" is falsifying, it may file an objection, and
editor GALILEAN ELECTRODYNAMICS should appoint a committee of three
university professors, who must decide whether or not my experiment falsifying
or not. If a majority of the Commission request that the experiment is not
falsifying, I'll pay the aforementioned amounts, and 2 000 dollars to each of the
committee members. However, if the Commission decides that the experiment
is falsifying, the applicant does not receive anything, but will have to pay for
2000 dollars to each of the professors.
I call on all Russian physicists strain minds. $ 100 000 - this is almost a Nobel
prize and will be awarded for the work, not the phantasmagoria. While task that
I set, it seems extremely simple. But it only seems that way! Otherwise 100,000
dollars out of my pocket, I would not pull out.
In concluding this preface, I can only say the following. Although Nicholas has
published many articles in Russian physics journals, his name and his
revolutionary discoveries known much more in the West (Japan include in the
"West"), than in Russia. Let us hope that the publication of this monograph will
help Russian physicists and electrical engineers to quickly understand what the
torch was lit in Siberia.
   Stefan Marinov,
   Director of the Institute for Fundamental Physics,
   City Graz, Austria


Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3796
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2015, 06:43:36 PM »
When a conductor cuts the lines of flux in a "uniform" magnetic field,
the current induced in the conductor, induces a subsequent magnetic field, which results in a change in flux.
When you work the change in flux equation backwards using this value, you find that both equations are applicable.

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2015, 09:32:20 PM »

Novosibirsk Scientist Refutes Physics Law Established about Two Hundred years Ago

Simultaneous Bidirectional Flux Induction for New Transformer Technology
Novosibirsk scientist, Professor of Harbin Polytechnic Institute, Head of Research and Technical Center 'Virus' Gennady Markov came out with a suggestion that the electromagnetic induction law discovered by Faraday in 1831 is not actually a law. According to Faraday, a magnetic flux in a ferromagnetic core of the transformer can be induced only in one direction. By Markov's theory the magnetic flux in a conductor can be induced simultaneously in both opposite directions. After several years of experimenting and practical studies Markov managed to prove the validity of his theory, develop an operable transformer on its base and obtain several international patents for his invention. In contrast to regular transformer, Markov's transformer has a vertically extended form and instead of the primary and secondary windings it has two primary windings with oncoming magnetic fluxes. By the new induction law, 'new' transformers can induce necessary voltage even from 'the worst iron' and can have considerably reduced sizes.

"In 1831 Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction - says Gennady Markov. - Then his ideas developed by Maxwell. After that, more than 160 years, no one was able to advance electrodynamics in the fundamental terms of a step. And eight years ago, I applied for an international patent, valid in 20 countries of the world, I created a transformer, which has already received four Russian patent. And my discovery was made "in spite of the laws of " the great physicists . Faraday , the magnetic fluxes in the yoke to successively shape - the contour in one direction. And only then works transformer . And I offered to do the opposite : to take the coil with the same number of turns and turn them towards each other . At the same time creates an equal number of turns and equal magnetic fluxes reaching towards each other, which cancel each other , but not destroyed ( as Faraday and Maxwell, they must be destroyed .) I discovered a new law : the principle of superposition of magnetic fields in a ferromagnetic material. The superposition - is the addition of fields. The essence of the law is that the magnetic fields that are mutually compensated , but not destroyed . And here is the word " but not destroyed " and is the key to open my law."

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2015, 06:42:20 PM »


From the preface by Stefan Marinov to the book
by Gennady V. Nikolaev, "Scientific Vacuum. Crisis in
Experimental Physics. Does the way out exist?" Tomks, 1999.


Offline sadang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2015, 07:42:43 PM »
Scalar and/or longitudinal waves are are not practical concepts. The vectorial and transversal waves are enough to eplain unusual phenomena? Let's see what has Stefan Marinov to say about a subject related to the above concepts, namely about Maxwell-Lorentz equations.

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #25 on: March 31, 2015, 12:27:19 AM »

I did not know the whole history of Marinov but I guess that that paper was published before 1990 or so. I think that Marinov later met with Nikolaev who persuaded him to look for longitudinal components to explain his results. In fact if your revise the two advertisements in Nature posted before it is clear the difference in his equations. It is just my guess.

The good thing about Marinov and Nikolaev is that they were two experimentalists. I like Physics based on experiments. Not just mathematical formulation based on nothing or just mind games.


Offline sadang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #26 on: March 31, 2015, 08:33:20 AM »
I don't know of what difference in his equations you talk, because the first advertisement is about so called "Faraday paradox" or the "relativity principle" which is wrong and the second one is about the nonexistence of displacement current. However, for me Nicolaev is a great surprise, because I did not know him and I did not read his works so far. Unfortunately I've not found many works in English.

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #27 on: April 01, 2015, 06:24:34 PM »
I was refering to the 1986 advertisement called "Marinov to the world Scientific Conscience" in post #15 and the 1996 advertisement called "Marinov: Annus Horribilis" published in post #16 and #17. Reading post #20 seems that MArinov and Nikolaev met in 1991 and Nikolaev persuaded him to take into account the scalar magnetic field as the cause of their results.


It seems that many other scientists also predict longitudinal forces not includen in curent theory. I add here two links, you can navigate along those websites and grasp deep into those subjects. One is related to Ampere longitudinal force, theory erradicated after the advent of relativity theory. I think that Weber also developed the ampere findings into a electrodynamics theory([size=78%][/size][size=78%]) and others as ([/size][size=78%][/size][size=78%]).[/size]

Science should look back to recover the lost path as consecuence of following current uncomplete EM theory.


Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #28 on: April 18, 2015, 01:50:06 AM »
Three interesting reading about Ampere Electrodynamics, the first one contains a very interesting experiment to test. those articles explains why it was suppressed and now Maxwell is known and Ampere electrodynamics is sadly forgotten.

Experiment:  Is anyone willing to do it and post a video?

"  About two months ago, I read in a column by Jeffery Kooistra in Infinite Energy magazine (Issue 27, 1999) of a simple and paradoxical experiment, originally proposed by Dr. Peter Graneau, the author of Ampère-Neumann Electrodynamics in Metals and other works. The result so fascinated me that I decided to reproduce the experiment on my own. Two 42-inch lengths of half-inch (i.d.) copper pipe were mounted, each on a separate length of 1 x 3 lumber, and laid parallel to one another, like rails, about 12 inches apart. The opposite terminals of a 12-volt automotive battery were connected to the copper rails. When the circuit is completed, by placing a 24-inch length of copper pipe perpendicularly across the two parallel pipes, the shorter pipe begins to roll down the track, accelerating to the end, and sparking and sputtering as it goes in a delightful display. One familiar with the Ampère angular force (see 21st Century, Fall 1996, “The Atomic Science Textbooks Don’t Teach,” p. 21), will see that an explanation based on repulsion between elements of current in the parallel rods, and those in the movable, perpendicular portion of the circuit, is at hand—although, the same motion can be accounted for by thealgebraically equivalent i x B forces considered in Maxwell’s formulations.
The paradox which the designer of the experiment wished to demonstrate comes in the next part. If we replace the 24-inch copper pipe with an equivalent length of steel pipe, the steel pipe rolls in the opposite direction! Why? I asked Dr. Graneau, who was kind enough to provoke my added interest by telling me that he didn’t know, and that he didn’t know of anybody who did.  "

Offline sadang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: Is Faraday´s Induction Law correct?
« Reply #29 on: April 18, 2015, 08:14:00 PM »
Interesting experiment. I tried with a lab source of 5A, but the max. current is too small. I can confirm there is a tendency for this movement, but the effect is not fully observable with this setup. However at a short research on the net I found the original experiment of Ampere. here it is:

Maybe someone with a car battery can replicate this experiment.