Howard Johnson: Permanent Magnet Motor


![](0logo.gif)  
**[rexresearch.com](../index.htm)**

---

**Howard
JOHNSON**

**Magnet Motor**



---

**[*Science & Mechanics*:
"Amazing Magnet-Powered Motor" (Spring 1980)](#scimech)**   
**[H. Johnson & W. Harrison, Jr:" The
Permanent Magnet Motor"](#4151431)**   
**[USP # 4,151,431: Permanent Magnet Motor](#4151431)**
  
**[USP # 4,877,983: Magnetic Force Generating
Method & Apparatus](#4877983)**   
**[USP # 5,402,021: Magnetic Propulsion System](#5402021)**
  
**[Tom Bearden/Karl Bergmann Comments](#comments)**
  
[**Blueprints**](#blueprint)  
 **[Lab Memorandum, CTEC, Inc](johnsnrpt.doc) (1996)
( MS Word.doc, 1 MB )**  
  



---

**Howard R. Johnson**   
![](1hjohnsn.gif)

***Science & Mechanics*  (Spring 1980) Cover
Illustration**   
![](1smcovr.gif)

**Figure 1**   
![](1sm1mtr.gif)

***Science & Mechanics***  (Spring
1980) 


**"Amazing Magnet-Powered Motor"**

**by**   
**Jorma Hyypia**

"We don't grant patents on perpetual motion machines," said the
examiners at the U.S. Patent Office. "It won't work because it
violates the law of Conservation of Energy," said one physicist
after another. But because, inventor Howard Johnson is not the
sort of man to be intimidated by such seemingly authoritative
pronouncements, he now owns U.S. Patent No. 4,151,431 which
describes how it is possible to generate motive power, as in a
motor, using only the energy contained in the atoms of permanent
magnets. That's right. Johnson has discovered how to build
motors that run without an input of electricity or any other
kind of external energy!

The monumental nature of the invention is obvious, especially
in a world facing an alarming, escalating energy shortage. Yet
inventor Johnson is not rushing to peddle his creation as the
end-all solution to world- wide energy problems. He has more
important work to do. First, there's the need to refine his
laboratory prototypes into workable practical devices -in
particular a 5,000-watt electric power generator already in the
building. His second and perhaps more difficult major challenge:
persuade a host of skeptics that his ideas are indeed practical.

Johnson, who has been coping with disbelievers for decades, can
be very persuasive in a face-to-face encounter because he can
not do more than merely theorize; he can demonstrate working
models that unquestionably create motion using only permanent
magnets. When this writer was urged by the editor of Science
& Mechanics to make a thousand mile pilgrimage to
Blacksburg, Virginia, to meet with the inventor, he went there
as an "open-minded skeptic" and as a former research Scientist
determined not to be fooled. Within two days, this former
skeptic had become a believer. Here's why.

**Doing the Unthinkable**

Howard Johnson refuses to view the "laws" of science as somehow
sacred, so doing the unthinkable and succeeding is second nature
to him. If a particular law gets in the way, he sees no harm in
going around it for a while to see if there's something on the
other side. Johnson explains the persistent opposition he
experiences from the established scientific community this way:
"Physics is a measurement science and physicists are especially
determined to protect the "Law" of Conservation of Energy. Thus
the physicists become game wardens who tell us what laws' we
can't violate. In this case they don't even know what the game
is. But they are so scared that I and my associates are going to
violate some of these laws, that they have to get to the pass to
head us off!"

The critics say Johnson offers a "free lunch" solution to
energy problems, and that there can be no such thing. Johnson
demurs, reminding repeatedly that he has never suggested that
his invention provides something for nothing. He also points gut
that no one talks about a "free lunch" when discussing
extraction of enormous amounts of atomic power by means of
nuclear reactors and atom bombs. In his mind, it's much the same
thing.

Johnson is the first to admit he doesn't actually know where
the power be has tapped derives. But he postulates that the
energy may be associated with spinning electrons, perhaps in the
form of a "presently unnamed atomic particle." How do other
physicists react to Johnson's suggestion that there may be an
atomic particle so far overlooked by nuclear physicists? Says
Johnson: "I guess it’s fair to say that most of them
are revolted." On the other hand, a few converted scientists,
including some who are associated with large and prestigious
research laboratories, are intrigued enough to suggest that
there should be a hunt for the answer, be it a "particle" or
some other as yet unsuspected characteristic of atomic
structure.

This article is prefaced with the foregoing brief summary of
the ongoing controversy so that, in fairness to the inventor, we
might all view his claims with open minds, even if it means
temporary setting aside of cherished scientific concepts until
more complete explanations are forthcoming. The main question to
be answered here and now is this: Does Johnson permanent magnet
motor work?

Before providing the answer, we need to face up to another
question that undoubtedly nags in the minds of many readers: Is
Johnson a bona fide researcher, or merely a "garage mechanic"
mad inventor? As the following brief summary suggests, the
inventor's credentials appear to be impeccable. Following seven
years of college and university training, Johnson worked on
atomic energy projects at Oak Ridge, did magnetics research for
Burroughs company, and served as scientific consultant to Lukens
Steel. He has participated in the development of medical
electrical products, including injection devices. For the
military he invented a ceramic muffler that makes a portable
motor generator silent at 50 feet; this has been in production
for the past 18 years. His contributions to the motor industry
include: a hysteresis brake; non-locking brake materials for
anti- skid application, new methods of curing brake linings; and
a method of dissolving asbestos fibers. He has also worked on
silencers for small motors, a super charger, and has perfected a
92-pole no-brush generator to go in the wheel of Lincoln
automobiles as a skid control; that last item reduced the cost
to one-eighth of the cost of an earlier design by utilizing
metal-filled plastics for the armature and field. In all,
Johnson is connected with more than 30 patents in the fields of
chemistry and physics.

![](1sm2.jpg)  
![](1sm3.gif)

**Figures 2, 3 & 4: Magnet Motor Models ~ Pictured here
are three of the inventor's early models. Top left is a linear
motor which propels a magnetic vehicle at high speeds through
a series of rings. Top right is rotary motor upon which the
prototype will be built. The 8-ounce manget, hand held to the
large ring weighing 40 pounds, provides enough force to spin
the entire assembly. In the third assembly above, the vehicle
is propelled, in either direction, by the force of the large
magnets arranged below tracks.**

**Sticky Tape Scientist**

Despite his impressive credentials, this amiable and
unpretentious inventor likes to characterize himself as a
"Sticky tape" scientist. He sees no virtue in wasting time
building fancy, elaborate equipment when more simple assemblies
serve as well to test new ideas. The prototype devices shown in
the photographs in this article were assembled with sticky tape
and aluminum foil, the later material being used mainly to keep
individual, permanent magnets packaged together so that they do
not fly apart.

Perhaps the best way to describe what these three gadgets do is
by reciting this writer's personal experiences during the
interview demonstration. That way I will not merely be telling
what the inventor says they do, but I will reveal what happened
when I tried the experiments myself. When we start talking about
how and why the things work as they do, well have to rely on the
inventor’s explanations.

The first item consists of more than a dozen foil-wrapped
magnets assembled to form a broad arc. Each magnet is extended
upward slightly at each end to form a low U-shape, the better to
concentrate magnetic fields where they are needed. The overall
curvature of the mass of magnets apparently has no particular
significance except to show that the distance between these
stator magnets and the moving vehicle is not critical. A
transparent plastic sheet atop this magnet assembly supports a
length of plastic model railroad track. The vehicle, basically a
model railroad flatcar, supports a foil-wrapped pair of curved
magnets, plus some sort of weight, in some cases merely a rock.
The weight is needed to keep the vehicle down on the track,
against the powerful magnetic forces that would otherwise push
it askew. That 'is all there is to the construction of this
representation of a "linear motor."

I was prepared to develop eye strain in an effort to detect
some sort of motion in the vehicle. I need not have been
concerned. The moment the inventor let go of the vehicle be
carefully placed at one end of the track, it accelerated and
literally zipped from one end to the other and flew onto the
floor! Wow!

I tried the experiment myself, and could feel the powerful
magnetic forces at work as I placed the vehicle on the track. I
gently eased the vehicle to the critical starting point, taking
great care not to exert any kind of forward push, even
inadvertently. I let go, Zip! It was on the floor again, at the
other end of the track. Knowing that I would be asked if the
track might have had a slant, I reversed the vehicle and started
it from the opposite end of the track. It worked just as
effectively in the reverse direction. In fact, the vehicle can
even navigate a respectable upgrade. In light of these tests,
and considering the remarkable speed of the vehicle, you can
discount any notion that this was a simple "coasting" effect.

Incidentally, the photograph shows the vehicle about half ways
along the track. It was "frozen" there by the electronic flash
used to make the picture; there is no way of "posing" the
vehicle in that position short of tying it down.

The second device has the U-shaped magnets standing on end in a
rough circular arrangement oddly reminiscent of England's
Stonehenge. This assembly is mounted on a transparent plastic
sheet supported on a plywood panel pivoted, underneath, on a
free turning wheel obtained from a skateboard. As instructed, I
eased the 8-ounce focusing magnet into the ring of larger
magnets, keeping it at least four inches away from the ring. The
40 pound magnet assembly immediately began to turn and
accelerated to a very respectable rotating speed which it
maintained for as long as the focusing magnet was held in the
magnetic field. When the focusing magnet was reversed, the large
assembly turned in the opposite direction.

Since this assembly is clearly a crude sort of motor, there's
no doubt that it is indeed possible to construct a motor powered
solely by permanent magnets.

The third assembly, which looks like the bones of some
prehistoric sea creature, consists of a tunnel constructed of
rubber magnet material that can be easily bent to form rings.
This was one of the demonstration models Johnson took to the
U.S. Patent Office during his appeal proceedings. Normally the
patent examiners spend only a few minutes with each patent
applicant, but played with Johnson’s devices for the
better part of an hour. As the inventor was leaving, he
overheard one sideline observer remark: "How would you like to
follow that act?!"

It took Johnson about six years of legal hassling to finally
obtain his patent, and he has been congratulated for his
ultimate victory over patent office bureaucracy as well as for
his inventiveness. One sign that he left the patent office more
than a little shaken by the experience was the inclusion of
diagrammatic material in the printed patent that does not belong
there. So if you look up the patent, pay no attention to the
"ferrite" graph on the first page; it belongs in some other
patent!

The tunnel device of course worked very well in the inventor's
office during my visit although Johnson observed that the rubber
magnets are perhaps a thousand times weaker than the cobalt
samarium magnets used the other assemblies. There's just one big
problem with the more powerful magnets: they cost too much.
According to the inventor, the magnets used to construct the
Stonehenge rotating model are collectively worth more than one
thousand dollars. But there's no need to depend solely on
mass-production economies to bring the cost down to competitive
levels. Johnson and U.S. Magnets and Alloy Co. are in the
process of developing alternative, relatively low cost magnetic
materials that perform very well.

**How do they work?**

The drawing that shows a curved "arcuate" armature magnet in
three successive positions over a line of fixed stator magnets
provides at least highly simplified insights into the theory of
permanent magnet motive power generation. Johnson says curved
magnets with sharp leading and trailing edges are important
because they focus and concentrate the magnetic energy much more
effectively than do blunt-end magnets. These arcuate magnets are
made slightly longer than the lengths of two stator magnets plus
the intervening space, in Johnson's setups about 3-1/8 inches
long.

![](1sm4.gif)

Note that the stator magnets all have their North faces upward,
and that they are resting on a high magnetic permeability
support plate that helps concentrate the force fields. The best
gap between the end poles of the armature magnet and the stator
magnets appears to be about 3/8 inch.

As the armature north pole passes over a magnet, it is repelled
by the stator north pole; and there's an attraction when the
north pole is passing over a space between the stator magnets.
The exact opposite is of course true with respect to the
armature South pole. It is attracted when passing over a stator
magnet, repelled when passing over a space.

The various magnetic forces that come into play are extremely
complex, but the drawing shows some of the fundamental
relationships. Solid lines represent attraction forces, dashed
lines represent repulsion forces, and double lines in each case
indicate the more dominant forces.

As the top drawing indicates, the leading (N) pole of the
armature is repelled by the north poles of the two adjacent
magnets. But, at the indicated position of the armature magnet,
these two repulsive forces .(which obviously work against each
other), are not identical; the stronger of the two forces
(double dashed line) overpowers the other force and tends to
move the armature to the left. This left movement is enhanced by
the attraction force between the armature north pole and the
stator south pole at the bottom of the space between the stator
magnets.

But that's not all! Let's see what is happening simultaneously
at the other end (S) of the armature magnet. The length of this
magnet (about 3-1/8 inches) is chosen, in relation to the pairs
of stator in magnets plus the space between them, so that once
again the attraction/repulsion forces work to move the armature
magnet to the left. In this case the armature pole (S) is
attracted by the north surfaces of the adjacent stator magnets
but, because of the critical armature dimensioning, more
strongly by the magnet (double solid line) that tends to "pull"
the armature to the left. It overpowers the lesser "drag" effect
of the stator magnet to the right. Here also there is the added
advantage of, in this case, repulsion force between the south
pole of the armature and the south pole in the space between the
stator magnets.

The importance of correct dimensioning of the armature magnet
cannot be over-emphasized. If it is either too long or too
short, it could achieve an undesirable equilibrium condition
that would stall movement. The objective is to optimize all
force conditions to develop the greatest possible off-balance
condition, but always' in the same direction as the armature
magnet moves along the row of stator magnets. However, if the
armature is rotated 180 degrees and started at the opposite end
of the track, it would behave in exactly the same manner except
that it would, in this example, move from left to right. Also
note that once the armature is in motion, it has momentum that
helps carry it into the sphere of influence of the next pair of
magnets where it gets another push and pull, and additional
momentum.

**Complex Forces**

Some very complex magnetic forces are obviously at play in this
deceptively simple magnetic system, and at this time it is
impossible to develop a mathematical model of what actually
occurs. However, computer analysis of the system, conducted by
Professor William Harrison and his associates at Virginia
Polytechnic Institute (Blacksburg, VA), provide vital feedback
information that greatly helps in the effort to optimize these
complex forces to achieve the most efficient possible operating
design.

As Professor Harrison points out, in addition to the obvious
interaction between the two poles of the armature magnet and the
stator magnets, many other interactions are in play. The stator
magnets affect each other and the support plate. Magnet
distances and their strengths vary despite best efforts of
manufacturers to exercise quality controls. In the assembly of
the working model, there are inevitable differences between
horizontal and vertical air spaces. All these interrelated
factors must be optimized, which is why computer analysis in
this refinement stage is vital. It's a kind of information
feedback system. As changes are made in the physical design,
fast dynamic measurements are made to see whether the expected
results have actually been achieved. The 'new computer data is
then used to develop new changes in the design of the
experimental model. And so on, and on.

That very different magnetic conditions exist at the two ends
of the armature is shown by the actual experimental data
displayed in the table and associated graph. To obtain this
information, the researchers first passed the probe of an
instrument used to measure magnetic field strengths over the
stator magnets and the intervening spaces. We shall call this
the "Zero" level although there is a very tiny gap between the
probe and the tops of the stator magnets. These measurements in
effect indicate what each pole of the armature magnet "sees"
below as it passes over. the stator magnets.

Next the probe is moved to a position just beneath one of the
armature poles, at the top of the 3/8-inch armature-to-stator
air gap. Another set of magnetic flux measurements is made. The
procedure is repeated with the probe positioned just beneath the
other armature pole.

Now "Instinct" might suggest, and correctly so, that the flux
measurements at the top and bottom of the air gap will differ.
But if "instinct" also suggests that these differences are
pretty much the same at the two armature pole positions, you
would be very much in error!

![](1sm5.gif)

First study the two tables that show actual flux density
measurements. Note that in this particular experiment the total
magnetic flux amounted to 30,700 Gauss (the unit of magnetic
strength) when the probe was held at the "Zero" level under the
north pole of the magnet, and a total of 28,700 Gauss when the
probe was moved to the top of the 3/8-inch air gap. The
difference between these total 'measurements is 2,000 Gauss.

Similar readings made at the air gap between the south pole of
the armature and the stator magnets indicates a total flux at
"Zero" level of 33,725 Gauss, and 24,700 Gauss at the top of the
air gap. This time the difference is a much larger 9,025 Gauss,
or four and one half times greater than for the north pole!
Clearly, the magnetic force conditions are far from identical at
the two ends of the armature magnet.

The middle five pairs of figures from each table hive been
plotted in graphic form to make these differences more obvious.
In the top "South Pole" graph the dashed line connects, the
"Zero" level readings made over the stator magnets and over the
intervening air spaces. Points along the solid line indicate
comparable readings made with the probe just beneath the
armature south pole. It is easy to see that there is an average
43% reduction of the attraction between the armature and stator
magnets created by the air gap. Equally true, but perhaps not so
obvious, is the fact that there is an average 36% increase of
repulsion when the south pole of the armature passes over the
spaces between the stator magnets. The percentage increase only
seems smaller because it applies to a much smaller "Zero" level
value.

The second graph shows that the changes are much less dramatic
at the north pole of the armature. In this case there's an
average 11.7% decrease of attraction over the spaces, and a 2.4%
increase, of repulsion when the armature north pole passes over
the stator magnets.

As you study the data, be sure to note that the columns are
labeled differently. In the case of the north pole data, the
stator magnet areas repulse the armature north pole while the
spaces between the stator magnets attract. The conditions are
exactly the opposite for the south pole of the armature magnet.
When the south pole passes over a magnet, there is strong
attraction; when it passes over a space, there is repulsion.

**The Ultimate Motor**

A motor based on Johnson's findings would be of extremely
simple design compared to conventional motors. As shown in the
diagrams developed from Johnson’s patent literature,
the stator/base unit would contain a ring of spaced magnets
backed by a high magnetic permeability sleeve. Three arcuate
armature magnets would be mounted in the armature which has a
belt groove for power transmission. The armature is supported on
ball bearings on a shaft that either screws or slides into the
stator unit. Speed control and start/stop action would be
achieved by the simple means of moving the armature toward and
away from the stator section.

There is a noticeable pulsing action in the simple prototype
units that may be undesirable in a practical motor. The movement
can be smoothed, the inventor believes, by simply using two or
more staggered armature magnets as shown in another drawing.

**What’s Ahead?**

For inventor Howard Johnson and his permanent magnet power
source there's bound to be plenty of controversy, certainly, but
also progress. A 5000 watt electric generator powered by a
permanent magnet motor is already on the way, and Johnson has
firm licensing agreements with at least four companies at this
writing.

Will we see permanent magnet motors in automobiles in the near
future? Johnson wants nothing to do with Detroit at this time
because, as he puts it: "It';s too emotional - we'd get smashed
into the earth!" The inventor is equally reluctant to make
predictions about other applications as well, mainly because he
just wants time to perfect his ideas and, hopefully, get the
scientific establishment to at least consider his unorthodox
ideas with a more open mind.

For example, Johnson argues that the magnetic forces in a
permanent magnet represent superconductance that is akin to
phenomena normally associated only with extremely cold
superconducting systems. He argues that a magnet is a room
temperature superconducting system because the electron flow
does not cease, and because this electron flow can be made to do
work. And for those who pooh- pooh the idea that permanent
magnets do work, Johnson has an answer: "You come along with a
magnet and pick up a piece of iron, then some physicist says you
didn't do any work because you used that magnet. But you moved a
mass through a distance. Right? That's work that requires
energy. Or you can hold one magnet in the air indefinitely by
positioning it over another magnet with like poles facing. The
physicist will argue that because it involves magnetic
repulsion, no work is done. Yet if you support the same object
with air, they will agree in a minute that work is done!"

There's no doubt in Johnson's mind that he has succeeded in
extracting usable energy from the atoms of permanent magnets.
But does that imply that the electron spins and associated
phenomena that he thinks provide this power will eventually be
used up? Johnson makes no pretense of knowing the answer: I
didn't start the electron spins, and I don't know any way to
stop them - do you? They may eventually stop, but that is not my
problem."

Johnson still has many practical problems to solve to perfect
his invention. But his greater challenge may be to win general
acceptance of his ideas by an obviously nervous scientific
community in which many physicists remain compulsive about
defending the law of Conservation of Energy without ever
wondering whether that "law" really needs defending.

The dilemma facing Johnson is not really his dilemma but rather
that of other scientists who have observed his prototypes. The
devices obviously do work. But the textbooks say it shouldn't
work. And all that Johnson is really saying to the scientific
community is this: here is a phenomenon which seems to
contradict some of our traditional beliefs. For all our sakes
let's not dismiss it outright but take the time to understand
the complex forces at work here.

---



**The Permanent Magnet Motor**

**by**   
**Howard R. Johnson**   
**&**   
**William P. Harrison, Jr.**

( Engineering Fundamentals Division, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA )

Presented at the UNITAR ( UN Institute for Training &
Research ) Conference on Long-Term Energy Resource, Montreal,
Canada, November 26-December 7, 1979.

**I. Introductory remarks (by Mr. Johnson)**

Today when energy is so expensive, it is not hard to drum up
interst for most any avenue that offers a breath of hope or a
way of escape, but this was not necessarily so in 1942.  We
were somewhat satisfied and convinced that we had the main
sources of energy in view. So it took a pure act of faith to try
to develop a new un-named source.

It took faith to spend time on it. It took faith to spend money
on it. And it took faith to consider facing the opposition later
when I made my work known and faced all the *status quo*
people.

So, in 1942 using the Bohr model of the atom, and knowing that
unpaired electron spins created a permanent magnet dipole, I
kept wondering why we couldn't use these fields to drive
something. I was sure that the magnetic effect of the spins was
similar enough to the field of a current in a wire to do the
same thing. I had no knowledge of electron spins stopping and
knew no method that I could exert to stop them, so I decided to
try to work out a method to use them.

At the same time there were no good hard magnetic materials
that I knew of, materials that could be opposed with strong
magnetic fields and not be demagnetized enough to damage them.
Not only that, they would not give the thrust that I desired.

Having a chemical background, I thought it would be nice to use
the best magnetic materials I could find in combination with an
interstitial material that was highly diamagnetic to force the
electron spin to stay in place.

The U.S. Navy later made such a compound using bismuth and good
magnetic materials, but the internal coercive forces were so
great that this strong magnet would fall apart if not encased in
glass. It was also expensive.

So I kept checking magnetic materials while I worked on designs
that I thought should be implemented. It was a quiet, sometimes
lonely job over the years, for I didn't share my plans with my
associates. My self-imposed security would not permit it, and I
knew of few people who would be interested anyway.

In the fifties, as ceramic magnets became better and harder,
and long-field metal magnets appeared on the scene, I began to
freeze some designs and to have magnets custom made to fit them.

It was about this time that I mentioned the fact that just as I
believed electron spins made permanent magnets, I also believed
that they were responsible for the 60 deg angles in the structure
of snowflakes giving the six-spoked wheel, the six-sided spokes,
etc. The dean of the school where I was teaching said, "Maybe
so" and ask me if I knew that snowflakes were mentioned in the
Bible as being important. I told him, "No, I didn't know that,"
but I looked it up. It said: "Hast thou entered into the
treasures of the snow? Or hast thou seen the treasures of the
hail? Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against
the day of battle and war."

My comment was, "Well, maybe this is more important than I
thought." So I went ahead and worked on it another ten years.

I went to the Library of Congress and looked up snowflakes. I
found a wonderful book there by Dr. Bentley of New Hampshire. He
has spend many years making these studies, and he had learned a
lot, as well as turning out one of the world's most beautiful
books. He had found that snowflakes have gas pockets oriented on
60 deg angles and that the gas has a higher percentage of oxygen
than air. That's one reason why snow water rusts so well. This
higher concentration of oxygen also interested me because oxygen
is more attracted to a magnetic field than other gases.

Finally, using the best ceramic magnets I could find and the
best metal magnets, I worked out a scheme for a linear motor.
The stator would be laid out as if it were unwound from around a
motor. The parts of the armature would ride just above the
stator and have the same beveled angular orientations I have
just mentioned.

Dies were made for the curved armature magnets, and an order
was placed for these shapes, despite the objections of magnet
manufacturers who said it was a bad design. They didn't know
what it was for, but they were sure it was a bad design. They
wanted to make horseshoe magnets. They even begged me to content
myself with half an order. I did not agree --- and once again
you have that little matter of faith; faith to try to implement
a new theory; faith to spend your own limited funds when you
have a a family and other financial responsibilities staring you
in the face; faith to buck the recognized authorities and
manufacturers in the field; faith to believe that your work is
good and that some day, despite all the hazards, you will apply
for and receive patent rights in your own country and perhaps
throughout the rest of the world; and finally, faith that you
can resist being smashed into dust by industrial giants and/or
being robbed by others who know only how to steal.

Believe it or not, my first motor assembly showed about two
pounds of thrust. The little toy car on which I fastened the
armature magnets for support ran in both directions over the
stator, showing that the focusing and timing of the interactions
was not too bad.

This was the first light at the end of a rather dark tunnel I
had been traveling for many years. I breathed a real sign of
relief as my young son played with this "new toy," and was able
to operate it as easily as I could.

After much testing of linear and circular designs, and looking
for an attorney for years suited to securing a patent on the new
theoretical work, I was led to Dunkan Beaman of Beaman &
Beamon in Jackson, Michigan. It took some time to prepare the
patent.  The attorney built some models himself to check
certain parameters. Finally, we entered the case in the patent
office expecting a lot of opposition. We were correct. We got
it. But again, faith saved the day as we battled for many years
to gain a rather complete victory.

Now the work requires different kinds of faith: faith in those
who have taken cut licenses and who will license; faith to
continue the research to replace scarce materials in the
magnets; and faith that this work will continue to progress and
that it will eventually fulfill its goal.

For a number of reasons, the permanent magnet motor has not
received much consideration. In fact, nothing too radical has
been done since Faraday took some very crude materials and
showed the world that it was possible to make a motor. 
This work of his largely influenced the thinking of Clerk
Maxwell and others who followed.

Today, the two greatest obstacles to using a permanent magnet
motor are, first, the belief that it violates the conservation
of energy law; and, secondly, that the magnetic fields of
attraction and repulsion decrease according to the inverse
square law then the air gap is increased.

In fact, both contentions are quite wrong because they are
based on wrong considerations.

The permanent magnet is a long time energy source.  This
has been shown for many years in the rating of magnets as high
or low energy sources for many applications over long
usage.

A loudspeaker composed entirely of electromagnets would be
unreal in size and energy consumption.  Yet, despite
examples of this type, many hesitate to apply the same
principles to motors and extend them even further by using
permanent magnets for both the stator and armature.

The elements of all electric and permanent magnet motors are
similar. A field imbalance must be created, the fields
must be focused and timed, and magnetic
leakage must be controlled.

In the wound motor, brushes and contact rings give the timing,
the size and shape of the wound fields and poles gives the
focusing, and the motor case and kind of iron used help to limit
the leakage.

In our permanent magnet motors the timing is built into the
motors by the size, shape, and spacing
of the magnets in the stator and armature. The focusing
is controlled by the shape of the magnets, pole
length, and the width of the air gap. This air
gap, through which magnets oppose and attract each other, is a
rare phenomenon.  Usually when a magnetic air gap is
increased, the field decreases inversely as the square.

When the air gap of the permanent magnet motor is increased, a
curious but definite change takes place.  There is a large
decrease in the reading at south pole of the armature
and an increase in the reading at the north pole. Thus,
a Hall-effect sensing probe will give a higher gauss reading at
the north pole and a decreasing count at the south pole. This
helps explain why the thrust is better with a larger air gap
than a smaller one. The attracting field is minimized and will
not produce a locking force, while the repulsion of the crescent
magnet is great enough to generate a thrust vector component
that will drive the armature.

As I tried to explain in the patent, I believe that the
permanent magnet is the first room temperature super conductor.
In fact, I believe that super conductors are simply large wound
magnets. The current in a super conductor is not initiated by a
strong emf, such as a battery, but is instead actually induced
into existence by a magnetic field. Then, in order to determine
how much current may be flowing in the super conductor coil, we
measure its magnetic field. This appears to be something like
going out the door and coming back in the window.

Another rather unique feature of super conductors is the fact
that their magnetic lines of force experience a change in
direction. No longer do these lines flow at right angles to the
conductor, but they now exist parallel to the conductor.
Theoretically, the heavy conductor currents exist in the fine
filaments of niobium within each small wire of niobium tin from
which such super conductors are made. Isn't it interesting that
the finer the wire the less the resistance until eventually
there is no resistance at all?

**II.  Theoretical Analysis (presented by William P.
Harrison, Jr.)**

**1. Introduction**

Despite the fact that the linear version of the permanent
magnet motor (Johnson, 1979) may appear conceptually simple (see
Fig. 1), the complex interactions of the fields alone place it
in a class with other quite sophisticated motive systems.

**Figure 1: Partial Front and Plan Views of a Linear Model of
the Howard Johnson Permanent Magnet Motor**

![](2ppfig1.gif)

Many parameters play an important part in making possible the
successful design of a permanent magnet motor. A number of these
variables relate directly to the geometry of the system and its
components.  Mathematical models for both the linear and
circular versions of Mr. Johnson's motors are presently under
development, and include such controllable parameters as
stator-to-armature air gap, stator element air gap spacing,
armature pole length, stator magnet dimensions, magnet material
variations, magnetic permeability and geometry of backing
metals, and multiple armature couplings, to mention only a few.
However, much of the early work involved quit simple
mathematical investigations, and even at this level some
remarkable revelations resulted. Also, as often is true with
simple models, considerable insight into the mechanisms that
might prove predominant was gained.  Therefore, it is our
intention to share with you some of those early analytical
investigations and findings.

Even though Coulomb's Law, embodying the inverse square
relationship as it does, may yet prove suspect, it nevertheless
provides an exceedingly simple yet viable form upon which to
base an elementary model of the linear version of the permanent
magnet motor. Describing the interaction between two magnetic
monopoles, Coulomb's Law in vector form is recalled as

(1) ![](2ppeq1.gif)

where M and M' are the pole strengths (positive if north,
negative if south), *u* [mu] is the permeability of the
medium in which the poles are located, *r* is the
straight-line separation distance between the two poles, and
*f* [ *f* with line over top] is the vector of
force (see Fig. 2) acting at each pole (positive in magnitude
for repulsion and negative for attraction).

**Figure 2: Coulomb's Law**

![](2ppfig2.gif)

The vector nature of Eq. (1), the fact that f's line of action
is colinear with the straight-line distance *r* between
poles, its superposition properties when applied to multiple
poles, and its restriction to static systems fixes in space are
all well known conditions on Eq. (1).  We will use the
superposition property of Eq. (1) to extend its application to a
spatial domain containing many more poles than the two shown in
Fig. 2.  However, Eq. (1) will first be resolved into
scalar components so that analytical expressions can be more
easily developed.

Our analysis will be two-dimensional and coplanar, restricted
to the vertical x-y plane.  It should be noted that the
horizontal stator "track" of H.R. Johnson's linear model
comprises a plurality of flat magnets, rectangular in cross
section, each having an aspect ratio (length-to-thickness ratio)
of 16.  This high value contributes to the two-dimensional
nature of the model and helps to minimize and effects in the z
direction.  Thus there is some justification for a
two-dimensional analysis, at least in the case of the linear
model we are considering here.

**Figure 3: Positional Locations of Two Opposing North
monopoles in X-Y Space ~**

![](2ppfig3.gif)

As shown in Fig. 3, we consider first a north pole of strength
M located at coordinates (*E* [epsilon], *n* [nu])
with a second north pole of strength M', located on the x-axis
at (x,0).  Force *f*, acting on the monopole
at (*E,n*), when resolved into its horizontal and vertical
components yields, respectively,

(2) ![](2ppeq2.gif)

and

(3) ![](2ppeq3.gif)

**2. The Attractive Sheet**

**Figure 4: Spatial Orientation of Thin, Magnetized Sheet
having high aspect ratio and with S side face up**   
![](2ppfig4.gif)

To illustrate some of the assumptions and extensions of
Coulomb’s Law that will be made, the simple example of
a magnetic sheet lying along the x-axis will be considered first
(see Fig. 4). The sheet, of finite length L, is a permanent
magnet magnetized across its y-direction thickness and having a
high aspect ratio (to eliminate z-direction edge effects). The
south-pole face will be oriented up, with north facing downward
on the underside of the sheet. Underside effects will be ignored
as though the sheet represented a continuous distribution of
only south monopoles along the x-axis. To incorporate such
distributions into Eq. (1) we replace M’ with the
differential dM’ and introduce the function B(x) so
that

(4)     dM’ = B(x) dx

Then the magnitude of the total force vector, F, acting on an
isolated north monopole of strength M situated somewhere within
the upper half of the x-y plane, becomes

(5) ![](2ppeq5.gif)

where x is the ratio x/L. Assuming that the magnetic density
along the sheet can be represented by the southern constant *-B*,
and neglecting end effects at x = 0 and x = L, Eq (5) reduces to

(6) ![](2ppeq6.gif)

where

(7) ![](2ppeq7.gif)

the strength parameter M’ having been determined by
integrating Eq (4) over the sheet length L, and *p*
is the ratio r/L.

**Figure 5: North Monopole Positioned Symmetrically above
the center of a magnetized, attracting sheet**

![](2ppfig5.gif)

**Figure 6: Force Imbalance Acting on a North Monopole above
a mangetized sheet tending to restore the pole to sheet
center**   
![](2ppfig6.gif)

If the north monopole is placed directly above the center of
the sheet, at coordinates (*E, n*), with *E* = L/2
and the vertical air-gap separation distance n taken as
arbitrary, the symmetrical distribution of incremental force
vectors acting at (*E,n*) will appear as shown in Fig. 5.
Note that a shift of the north monopole to the left results in a
force imbalance which tends to pull the pole back to the right,
as shown in Fig. 6. So considering now only the x-component of F,
similar to Eq (2) we write

(8) ![](2ppeq8.gif)

where X and Y are the dimensionless ratios

(9) ![](2ppeq9.gif)

and

(10) ![](2ppeq10.gif)

For any fixed position (X,Y) of the north monopole in the upper
half plane, Eq (8) can be integrated to give

(11) ![](2ppeq11.gif)

**Figure 7: X-Direction Distribution of the X-Component of
attractive force exerted on a north monopole by a thin,
magnetized sheet**   
![](2ppfig7.gif)

This ratio is shown in Fig (7) as a continuous function of X
locations with Y treated parametrically. The Y = 1 curve
represents the field influence on the north monopole situated at
a constant air-gap separation (*n* = L) quite some vertical
distance above the sheet; whereas at Y = 0.1 the monopole is
located much closer to the x axis. Reversal of the force
component through its zero value at mid-sheet (X = 1/2) is clearly
shown.

In order to trace some trajectories through this field, we now
observe that the y-component of force *F* will be

(12) ![](2ppeq12.gif)

This function is shown in Fig (8) with a Y value of 0.20

**Figure 8: [Missing]**

In dimensionless form the equations of motion for trajectory
paths of the monopole above the sheet in planar X-Y space become

(13) ![](2ppeq13.gif)

and

(14) ![](2ppeq14.gif)

where

(15) ![](2ppeq15.gif)

(16) ![](2ppeq16.gif)

and

(17) ![](2ppeq17.gif)

In these expression *t* is real time and *T* is
simply a time constant chosen arbitrarily. As previously noted,
*L* is the length of the sheet; whereas, *g* is the
gravitational acceleration constant and *W* is the
downward weight force of the moving monopole above the sheet.
For magnetic force terms (rx)mag and (ry)mag
we substitute directly Eq (11) and Eq (12), respectively.

Several of the trajectories resulting from the integration of
Eq (13) and Eq (14) are shown in Fig.9. They all exhibit the
expected behavior. As already implied in the discussion of Fig.
7, the function (rx)mag given by Eq (11)
has a stable point of equilibrium at X = 1/2 and therefore drives
the free-falling monopole towards the sheet center, regardless
of the initial drop-point location. The function (ry)mag
from Eq (12) is equally persuasive in pulling the monopole down
towards the sheet itself, and manifests that attraction quite
pervasively throughout the integration of Eq (14), even when the
*G* term may be omitted (as it was in the trajectories of
Fig. 9). Actually, the computer integration procedure will not
carry the monopole all the way to surface contact with the sheet
at Y = 0 because of the infinite condition which exists there as
reflected by Eq (12). Thus, tailings of these trajectories (Fig
9) have been completed by manually overriding the plotter.

**Figure 9: Trajectories of a North Monopole in an
attractive field generated by the thin, magnetized sheet
lying in the X-interval 0-1**   
![](2ppfig9.gif)

As we would anticipate in working with this type of central
field, where *B* in Eq (4) is a simple constant, the field
is conservative with curl of F vanishing. Also, the reverse
symmetry of (rx)mag about X = 1/2, as seen
in Fig. 7, confirms that the energy integral for this function
will vanish without any appropriate limit pairs of X.

**3. The Repulsive Sheet**

By substituting *+B* instead of *-B* for *B*
in Eq (4), the sheet of length L lying along the x-axis becomes
repulsive, with its northern face directed upward, opposing the
north monopole above it at location (*E,n*). Of course the
sign in Eq (6) becomes positive and the functions (rx)mag
and (ry)mag reverse their behavior
accordingly, as illustrated in Fig. 10. Again (rx)mag
will have an equilibrium point at X = 1/2, but now it is
destabilizing. As a consequence, resulting trajectories for the
north monopole are much more interesting in this case than they
were with the attractive sheet. Several paths are shown in Fig
11 with different values used for the W/*J*
trajectory in Eq (17). Parameter G was included, and in each
example the trajectories commenced at (0.9, 0.2) with zero
initial velocity.

**Figure 10: X-Direction Distributions of (rx)mag
and (ry)mag for the repulsive field
of a thin, magnetized sheet acting on a moving north
monopole**   
![](2ppfig10.gif)

**Figure 11: Trajectories of a North Monopole in a repulsive
field generated by a thin, magnetized sheet lying in the
X-interval 0-1**   
![](2ppfig11.gif)

The attractive and repulsive sheet results are easily demonstrated
since rubberized flexible sheet magnets are commercially
available, such as those sold by the Permag Corp. of Jamaica, NY.
It may also be interesting to note that with slight modifications
this first simple analytical sheet model can be used to gain some
insight into operation of the so-called "magnetic Wankel" reported
on by Scott (1979).

**Figure 12: Pole Strength Influence Factor, M', as a cosine
function of linear displacement distance, x**   
![](2ppfig12.gif)

**Figure 13: Experimentally Detemined Magnetic Flux Density,
B, along a linear model of the Johnson permanent magnet
motor**   
![](2ppfig13.gif)

**4. The Sinusoidal Model**

The first paper (Harrison, 1979) relating, indirectly, to any
mathematical analysis of the permanent magnet motor adopted a
cosine function (Fig 12) to simulate the distribution of
influence parameter M’ generated by the flat stator
track of Mr Johnson’s linear model. An experimentally
determined distribution, shown in Fig 13, was obtained by moving
a Hall-effect probe over the stator track of one of Mr
Johnson’s early linear models having seven flat
ceramic magnet elements. The figure shown was produced by a
plotter connected directly to the monitor computer controlling
positioning of the Hall probe and processing its output signal.
Ordinate values on the graph are magnetic flux density in gauss
measured relative to a predetermined background value. These
direct-reading experimental results suggest that the function

(18) ![](2ppeq18.gif)

substituted into Eq (4) should prove interesting to pursue as a
more challenging test of what might be gleaned from this simple
Coulomb model we have been discussing. It should be noted that
one of the important differences between the function (18) and
that shown in Fig 12 is that in Eq (18) the period length
parameter xp is double that shown in Figure 12.

Using Eq (18), the total force magnitude expression Eq (5)
becomes

(19) ![](2ppeq19.gif)

where a total track length distance of L has been used to form
the dimensionless ratios   
p = r/L,  x = x/L,  and  xp = xp/L. Also, if Eq
(7) is used for *J* in Eq (19), then in
that expression one must substitute the product BL for
M’.

Now we plan to hold Y constant while investigating linear
motion of the monopole along this track in the X-direction only.
So we need consider only the X-component of *F*
from Eq (19) which yields

(20) ![](2ppeq20.gif)

**Figure 14: Oscillatory Path of a North Monopole restrained
to x-direction motion over a three-element linear stator
assembly**   
![](2ppfig14.gif)

With this expression substituted into Eq (13), integration
becomes straightforward and yields the typical oscillatory type
of trajectory path shown in Fig 14. As Mr Johnson has brought
out, the focusing armature magnet of his linear model will start
at either end of the stator track simply by insuring that the
north end of this bipoled crescent is leading the south (see
Fig. 1). So, in Fig. 14, we are showing the X-direction motion
from right to left instead of from left to right as in our
previous examples. Also, by simply rotating the figure clockwise
through 90 degrees, it becomes easy to follow the behavior of
dimensionless velocity, Vx, in Fig 11, since Vx is
defined as

(21) ![](2ppeq21.gif)

It will be noted in Fig 14 that the north monopole has been
allowed to self-start its motion at the origin with Vx
initially zero.

We now discuss out final adjustment which proved to be an
exciting revelation at the time it was first investigated
several months ago. Johnson (1979, col. 5, line 39) states that
the horizontal air-gap spacing between the magnet elements which
the stator track comprises should vary slightly from normal in
order to smooth out movement of the armature. Introducing this
type of variation into a two-dimensional model, provided the
charge is nonuniform, would certainly transform the field from
conservative to nonconservative. It should by now be apparent
that only a nonconservative model has any chance at all of even
partially explaining the phenomena of the permanent magnet
motor.

With these thoughts in mind, an attempt was made to drive the
armature monopole of Fig 14 on to the second stator magnet and
beyond by varying the horizontal gap parameter xp during the
integration process (i.e., during the motion). The results are
shown in Fig 15. It was found that through small variations in *xp*
in Eq (20), as the monopole advanced along its trajectory path
from one X position to another, sufficient control over the
moving pole could be exercised to carry it over the full length
of the stator and beyond.

**Figure 15: Continuus Path of a North Monopole restrained
to x-direction motion shown traversing a linear stator
assembly comprised of seven permanent magnet elements**   
![](2ppfig15.gif)

**III. References**

Harrison, William P., Jr.: "A Solution for the Optimal Gap of a
Monopole Element Moving in a Sinusoidally Distributed Magnetic
Field", paper presented to the Engineering Section, Virginia
Academy of Science, 57th Annual Meeting, Richmond VA, May 8-11,
1979.

Johnson, Howard R: US Patent # 4,151,431 (April 24, 1979),
"Permanent Magnet Motor".

Scott, David, "Magnetic Wankel for Electric Cars", *Popular
Science*, p. 80, June 1979.

---



**US Patent #  4,151,431**

**Permanent Magnet Motor**   
**( April 24, 1979 )**

**Howard R. Johnson**

**Abstract ---** The invention is directed to the method of
utilizing the unpaired electron spins in ferro magnetic and
other materials as a source of magnetic fields for producing
power without any electron flow as occurs in normal conductors,
and to permanent magnet motors for utilizing this method to
produce a power source. In the practice of the invention the
unpaired electron spins occurring within permanent magnets are
utilized to produce a motive power source solely through the
superconducting characteristics of a permanent magnet and the
magnetic flux created by the magnets are controlled and
concentrated to orient the magnetic forces generated in such a
manner to do useful continuous work, such as the displacement of
a rotor with respect to a stator. The timing and orientation of
magnetic forces at the rotor and stator components produced by
permanent magnets to produce a motor is accomplished with the
proper geometrical relationship of these components.

Inventors:  Johnson; Howard R. (3300 Mt. Hope Rd., Grass
Lake, MI 49240)   
Appl. No.:  422306    ~  Filed: 
December 6, 1973

Current U.S. Class: 310/12; 310/152; 415/10; 415/916; 416/3;
505/877   
Intern'l Class:  H02K 041/00; H02N 011/00   
Field of Search:  24/DIG. 9 415/DIG. 2 46/236 ;134 A;135
A;136 B;137 AE;138 A 273/118 A,119 A,120 A,121 A,122 A,123
A,124,125 A, 126 A,130 A,131 A,131 AD

References Cited:

U.S. Patent Documents   
4,074,153 (Feb., 1978) Baker, et al. 310/12.

**Description**

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention pertains to the field of permanent magnet motor
devices solely using the magnetic fields created thereby to
product motive power.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Conventional electric motors employ magnetic forces to produce
either rotative or linear motion. Electric motors operate on the
principle that when a conductor is located in a magnetic field
which carries current a magnetic force is exerted upon it.

Normally, in a conventional electric motor, the rotor, or
stator, or both, are so wired that magnetic fields created by
electromagnetics may employ attraction, repulsion, or both types
of magnetic forces, to impose a force upon the armature to cause
rotation, or to cause the armature to be displaced in a linear
path. Conventional electric motors may employ permanent magnets
either in the armature or stator components, but in the art
heretofore known the use of permanent magnets in either the
stator or armature require the creation of an electromagnetic
field to act upon the field produced by the permanent magnets,
and switching means are employed to control the energization of
the electromagnets and the orientation of the magnetic fields,
to produce the motive power.

It is my belief that the full potential of magnetic forces
existing in permanent magnets has not been recognized or
utilized because of incomplete information and theory with
respect to the atomic motion occurring within a permanent
magnet. It is my belief that a presently unnamed atomic particle
is associated with the electron movement of a superconducting
electromagnet and the lossless current flow of Amperian currents
in permanent magnets. The unpaired electron flow is similar in
both situations. This small particle is believed to be opposite
in charge and to be located at right angles to the moving
electron, and the particle would be very small as to penetrate
all known elements, in their various states as well as their
known compounds, unless they have unpaired electrons which
capture these particles as they endeavor to pass therethrough.

Ferro electrons differ from those of most elements in that they
are unpaired, and being unpaired they spin around the nucleus in
such a way that they respond to magnetic fields as well as
creating one themselves. If they were paired, their magnetic
fields would cancel out. However, being unpaired they create a
measurable magnetic field if their spins have been oriented in
one direction. The spins are at right angles to their magnetic
fields.

In niobium superconductors at a critical state, the magnetic
lines of force cease to be at right angles. This change must be
due to establishing the required conditions for unpaired
electronic spins instead of electron flow in the conductor, and
the fact that very powerful electromagnets that can be formed
with superconductors illustrates the tremendous advantage of
producing the magnetic field by unpaired electron spins rather
than conventional electron flow.

In a superconducting metal, wherein the electrical resistance
becomes greater in the metal than the proton resistance, the
flow turns to electron spins and the positive particles flow
parallel in the metal in the manner occurring in a permanent
magnet where a powerful flow of magnetic positive particles or
magnetic flux causes the unpaired electrons to spin at right
angles. Under cryogenic superconduction conditions the freezing
of the crystals in place makes it possible for the spins to
continue, and in a permanent magnet the grain orientation of the
magnetized material results in the spins permitting them to
continue and for the flux to flow parallel to the metal.

In a superconductor, at first the electron is flowing and the
positive particle is spinning; later, when critical, the reverse
occurs, i.e., the electron is spinning and the positive particle
is flowing at right angles. These positive particles will thread
or work their way through the electron spins present in the
metal.

In a sense, a permanent magnet may be considered the only room
temperature superconductor. It is a superconductor because the
electron flow does not cease, and this electron flow can be made
to do work because of the magnetic field it supplies.
Previously, this source of power has not been used because it
was not possible to modify the electron flow to accomplish the
switching functions of the magnetic field. Such switching
functions are common in a conventional electric motor where
electrical current is employed to align the much greater
electron current in the iron pole pieces and concentrate the
magnetic field at the proper places to give the thrust necessary
to move the motor armature. In a conventional electric motor,
switching is accomplished by the use of brushes, commutators,
alternating current, or other known means.

In order to accomplish the switching function in a permanent
magnet motor, it is necessary to shield the magnetic leakage so
that it will not appear as too great a loss factor at the wrong
places. The best method to accomplish this is to use the
superconductor of magnetic flux and concentrate it to the place
where it will be the most effective. Timing and switching can be
achieved in a permanent magnet motor by concentrating the flux
and using the proper geometry of the motor rotor and stator to
make most effective use of the magnetic fields generated by the
electron spins. By the proper combination of materials, geometry
and magnetic concentration, it is possible to achieve a
mechanical advantage of high ratio, greater than 100 to 1,
capable of producing a continuous motive force.

To my knowledge, previous work done with permanent magnets, and
motive devices utilizing permanent magnets, have not achieved
the result desired in the practice of the inventive concept, and
it is with the proper combination of materials, geometry and
magnetic concentration that the presence of the magnetic spins
within a permanent magnet may be utilized as a motive force.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is an object of the invention to utilize the magnetic
spinning phenomenon of unpaired electrons occurring in ferro
magnetic material to produce the movement of a mass in a
unidirectional manner as to permit a motor to be driven solely
by magnetic forces as occurring within permanent magnets. In the
practice of the inventive concepts, motors of either linear or
rotative types may be produced.

It is an object of the invention to provide the proper
combination of materials, geometry and magnetic concentration to
utilize the force generated by unpaired electron spins existing
in permanent magnets to power a motor. Whether the motor
constitutes a linear embodiment, or a rotary embodiment, in each
instance the "stator" may consist of a plurality of permanent
magnets fixed relative to each other in space relationship to
define a track, linear in form in the linear embodiment, and
circular in form in the rotary embodiment. An armature magnet is
located in spaced relationship to such track defined by the
stator magnets wherein an air gap exists therebetween. The
length of the armature magnet is defined by poles of opposite
polarity, and the length of the armature magnet is disposed
relative to the track defined by the stator magnets in the
direction of the path of movement of the armature magnet as
displaced by the magnetic forces.

The stator magnets are so mounted that poles of like polarity
are disposed toward the armature magnet and as the armature
magnet has poles which are both attracted to and repelled by the
adjacent pole of the stator magnets, both attraction and
repulsion forces act upon the armature magnet to produce the
relative displacement between the armature and stator magnets.

The continuing motive force producing displacement between the
armature and stator magnets results from the relationship of the
length of the armature magnet in the direction of its path of
movement as related to the dimension of the stator magnets, and
the spacing therebetween, in the direction of the path of
armature magnet movement. This ratio of magnet and magnet
spacings, and with an acceptable air gap spacing between the
stator and armature magnets, will produce a resultant force upon
the armature magnet which displaces the armature magnet across
the stator magnet along its path of movement.

In the practice of the invention movement of the armature
magnet relative to the stator magnets results from a combination
of attraction and repulsion forces existing between the stator
and armature magnets. By concentrating the magnetic fields of
the stator and armature magnets the motive force imposed upon
the armature magnet is intensified, and in the disclosed
embodiments such magnetic field concentration means are
disclosed.

The disclosed magnetic field concentrating means comprise a
plate of high magnetic field permeability disposed adjacent one
side of the stator magnets in substantial engagement therewith.
This high permeability material is thus disposed adjacent poles
of like polarity of the stator magnets. The magnetic field of
the armature magnet may be concentrated and directionally
oriented by bowing the armature magnet, and the magnetic field
may further be concentrated by shaping the pole ends of the
armature magnet to concentrate the magnet field at a relatively
limited surface at the armature magnet pole ends.

Preferably, a plurality of armature magnets are used which are
staggered with respect to each other in the direction of
armature magnet movement. Such an offsetting or staggering of
the armature magnets distributes the impulses of force imposed
upon the armature magnets and results in a smoother application
of forces to the armature magnet producing a smoother and more
uniform movement of the armature component.

In the rotary embodiment of the permanent magnet motor of the
invention the stator magnets are arranged in a circle, and the
armature magnets rotate about the stator magnets. Means are
disclosed for producing relative axial displacement between the
stator and armature magnets to adjust the axial alignment
thereof, and thereby regulate the magnitude of the magnetic
forces being imposed upon the armature magnets. In this manner
the speed of rotation of the rotary embodiment may be regulated.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE
DRAWINGS

The aforementioned objects and advantages of the invention will
be appreciated from the following description and accompanying
drawings wherein:

FIG. 1 is a schematic view of electron flow in a superconductor
indicating the unpaired electron spins,

![](3fig1.gif)

FIG. 2 is a cross-sectional view of a superconductor under a
critical state illustrating the electron spins,

![](3fig2.gif)

FIG. 3 is a view of a permanent magnet illustrating the flux
movement therethrough,

![](3fig3.gif)

FIG. 4 is a cross-sectional view illustrating the diameter of
the magnet of FIG. 3,

![](3fig4.gif)

FIG. 5 is an elevational representation of a linear motor
embodiment of the permanent magnet motor of the invention
illustrating one position of the armature magnet relative to the
stator magnets, and indicating the magnetic forces imposed upon
the armature magnet,

![](3fig5.gif)

FIG. 6 is a view similar to FIG. 5 illustrating displacement of
the armature magnet relative to the stator magnets, and the
influence of magnetic forces thereon at this location,

![](3fig6.gif)

FIG. 7 is a further elevational view similar to FIGS. 5 and 6
illustrating further displacement of the armature magnet to the
left, and the influence of the magnetic forces thereon,

![](3fig7.gif)

FIG. 8 is a top plan view of a linear embodiment of the
inventive concept illustrating a pair of armature magnets in
linked relationship disposed above the stator magnets,

![](3fig8.gif)

FIG. 9 is a diametrical, elevational, sectional view of a
rotary motor embodiment in accord with the invention as taken
along section IX--IX of FIG. 10, and

![](3fig9.gif)

FIG. 10 is an elevational view of the rotary motor embodiment
as taken along section X--X of FIG. 9.

![](3fig10.gif)

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED
EMBODIMENTS

In order to better understand the theory of the inventive
concept, reference is made to FIGS. 1 through 4. In FIG. 1 a
superconductor 1 is illustrated having a positive particle flow
as represented by arrow 2, the unpaired electrons of the ferrous
conducting material 1 spin at right angles to the proton flow in
the conductor as represented by the spiral line and arrow 3. In
accord with the theory of the invention the spinning of the
ferrous unpaired electrons results from the atomic structure of
ferrous materials and this spinning atomic particle is believed
to be opposite in charge and located at right angles to the
moving electrons. It is assumed to be very small in size capable
of penetrating other elements and their compounds unless they
have unpaired electrons which capture these particles as they
endeavor to pass therethrough.

The lack of electrical resistance of conductors at a critical
superconductor state has long been recognized, and
superconductors have been utilized to produce very high magnetic
flux density electromagnets. FIG. 2 represents a cross section
of a critical superconductor and the electron spins are
indicated by the arrows 3.

A permanent magnet may be considered a superconductor as the
electron flow therein does not cease, and is without resistance,
and unpaired electric spinning particles exist which, in the
practice of the invention, are utilized to produce motor force.
FIG. 3 illustrates a horseshoe shaped permanent magnet at 4 and
the magnetic flux therethrough is indicated by arrows 5, the
magnetic flow being from the south pole to the north pole and
through the magnetic material. The accumulated electron spins
occurring about the diameter of the magnet 5 are represented at
6 in FIG. 4, and the spinning electron particles spin at right
angles in the iron as the flux travels through the magnet
material.

By utilizing the electron spinning theory of ferrous material
electrons, it is possible with the proper ferromagnetic
materials, geometry and magnetic concentration to utilize the
spinning electrons to produce a motive force in a continuous
direction, thereby resulting in a motor capable of doing work.

It is appreciated that the embodiments of motors utilizing the
concepts of the invention may take many forms, and in the
illustrated forms the basic relationships of components are
illustrated in order to disclose the inventive concepts and
principles.

The relationships of the plurality of magnets defining the
stator 10 are best appreciated from FIGS. 5 through 8. The
stator magnets 12 are preferably of a rectangular configuration,
FIG. 8, and so magnetized that the poles exist at the large
surfaces of the magnets, as will be appreciated from the N
(North) and S (South) designations. The stator magnets include
side edges 14 and 16 and end edges 18. The stator magnets are
mounted upon a supporting plate 20, which is preferably of a
metal material having a high permeability to magnetic fields and
magnetic flux such as that available under the trademark Netic
CoNetic sold by the Perfection Mica Company of Chicago,
Illinois. Thus, the plate 20 will be disposed toward the south
pole of the stator magnets 12, and preferably in direct
engagement therewith, although a bonding material may be
interposed between the magnets and the plate in order to
accurately locate and fix the magnets on the plate, and position
the stator magnets with respect to each other.

Preferably, the spacing between the stator magnets 12 slightly
differs between adjacent stator magnets as such a variation in
spacing varies the forces being imposed upon the armature magnet
at its ends, at any given time, and thus results in a smoother
movement of the armature magnet relative to the stator magnets.
Thus, the stator magnets so positioned relative to each other
define a track 22 having a longitudinal direction left to right
as viewed in FIGS. 5 through 8.

In FIGS. 5 through 7 only a single armature magnet 24 is
disclosed, while in FIG. 8 a pair of armature magnets are shown.
For purposes of understanding the concepts of the invention the
description herein will be limited to the use of single armature
magnet as shown in FIGS. 5 through 7.

The armature magnet is of an elongated configuration wherein
the length extends from left to right, FIG. 5, and may be of a
rectangular transverse cross-sectional shape. For magnetic field
concentrating and orientation purposes the magnet 24 is formed
in an arcuate bowed configuration as defined by concave surfaces
26 and convex surfaces 28, and the poles are defined at the ends
of the magnet as will be appreciated from FIG. 5. For further
magnetic field concentrating purposes the ends of the armature
magnet are shaped by beveled surfaces 30 to minimize the
cross-sectional area at the magnet ends at 32, and the magnetic
flux existing between the poles of the armature magnet are as
indicated by the light dotted lines. In like manner the magnetic
fields of the stator magnets 12 are indicated by the light
dotted lines.

The armature magnet 24 is maintained in a spaced relationship
above the stator track 22. This spacing may be accomplished by
mounting the armature magnet upon a slide, guide or track
located above the stator magnets, or the armature magnet could
be mounted upon a wheeled vehicle carriage or slide supported
upon a nonmagnetic surface or guideway disposed between the
stator magnets and the armature magnet. To clarify the
illustration, the means for supporting the armature magnet 24 is
not illustrated and such means form no part of invention, and it
is to be understood that the means supporting the armature
magnet prevents the armature magnet from moving away from the
stator magnets, or moving closer thereto, but permits free
movement of the armature magnet to the left or right in a
direction parallel to the track 22 defined by the stator
magnets.

It will be noted that the length of the armature magnet 24 is
slightly greater than the width of two of the stator magnets 12
and the spacing therebetween. The magnetic forces acting upon
the armature magnet when in the position of FIG. 5 will be
repulsion forces 34 due to the proximity of like polarity forces
and attraction forces at 36 because of the opposite polarity of
the south pole of the armature magnet, and the north pole field
of the sector magnets. The relative strength of this force is
represented by the thickness of the force line.

The resultant of the force vectors imposed upon the armature
magnet as shown in FIG. 5 produce a primary force vector 38
toward the left, FIG. 5, displacing the armature magnet 24
toward the left. In FIG. 6 the magnetic forces acting upon the
armature magnet are represented by the same reference numerals
as in FIG. 5. While the forces 34 constitute repulsion forces
tending to move the north pole of the armature magnet away from
the stator magnets, the attraction forces imposed upon the south
pole of the armature magnet and some of the repulsion forces,
tend to move the armature magnet further to the left, and as the
resultant force 38 continues to be toward the left the armature
magnet continues to be forced to the left.

FIG. 7 represents further displacement of the armature magnet
24 to the left with respect to the position of FIG. 6, and the
magnetic forces acting thereon are represented by the same
reference numerals as in FIGS. 5 and 6, and the stator magnet
will continue to move to the left, and such movement continues
the length of the track 22 defined by the stator magnets 12.

Upon the armature magnet being reversed such that the north
pole is positioned at the right as viewed in FIG. 5, and the
south pole is positioned at the left, the direction of movement
of the armature magnet relative to the stator magnets is toward
the right, and the theory of movement is identical to that
described above.

In FIG. 8 a plurality of armature magnets 40 and 42 are
illustrated which are connected by links 44. The armature
magnets are of a shape and configuration identical to that of
the embodiment of FIG. 5, but the magnets are staggered with
respect to each other in the direction of magnet movement, i.e.,
the direction of the track 22 defined by the stator magnets 12.
By so staggering a plurality of armature magnets a smoother
movement of the interconnected armature magnets is produced as
compared when using a single armature magnet as there is
variation in the forces acting upon each armature magnet as it
moves above the track 22 due to the change in magnetic forces
imposed thereon. The use of several armature magnets tends to
"smooth out" the application of forces imposed upon linked
armature magnets, resulting in a smoother movement of the
armature magnet assembly. Of course, any number of armature
magnets may be interconnected, limited only by the width of the
stator magnet track 22.

In FIGS. 9 and 10 a rotary embodiment embracing the inventive
concepts is illustrated. In this embodiment the principle of
operation is identical to that described above, but the
orientation of the stator and armature magnets is such that
rotation of the armature magnets is produced about an axis,
rather than a linear movement being achieved.

In FIGS. 9 and 10 a base is represented at 46 serving as a
support for a stator member 48. The stator member 48 is made of
a nonmagnetic material, such as synthetic plastic, aluminum, or
the like. The stator includes a cylindrical surface 50 having an
axis, and a threaded bore 52 is concentrically defined in the
stator. The stator includes an annular groove 54 receiving an
annular sleeve 56 of high magnetic field permeability material
such as Netic Co-Netic and a plurality of stator magnets 58 are
affixed upon the sleeve 56 in spaced circumferential
relationship as will be apparent in FIG. 10. Preferably, the
stator magnets 58 are formed with converging radial sides as to
be of a wedge configuration having a curved inner surface
engaging sleeve 56, and a convex outer pole surface 60.

The armature 62, in the illustrated embodiment, is of a dished
configuration having a radial web portion, and an axially
extending portion 64. The armature 62 is formed of a nonmagnetic
material, and an annular belt receiving groove 66 is defined
therein for receiving a belt for transmitting power from the
armature to a generator, or other power consuming device. Three
armature magnets 68 are mounted on the armature portion 64, and
such magnets are of a configuration similar to the armature
magnet configuration of FIGS. 5 through 7. The magnets 68 are
staggered with respect to each other in a circumferential
direction wherein the magnets are not disposed as 120.degree.
circumferential relationships to each other. Rather, a slight
angular staggering of the armature magnets is desirable to
"smooth out" the magnetic forces being imposed upon the armature
as a result of the magnetic forces being simultaneously imposed
upon each of the armature magnets. The staggering of the
armature magnets 68 in a circumferential direction produces the
same effect as the staggering of the armature magnets 40 and 42
as shown in FIG. 8.

The armature 62 is mounted upon a threaded shaft 70 by
antifriction bearings 72, and the shaft 70 is threaded into the
stator threaded bore 52, and may be rotated by the knob 74. In
this manner rotation of the knob 74, and shaft 70, axially
displaces the armature 62 with respect to the stator magnets 58,
and such axial displacement will very the magnitude of the
magnetic forces imposed upon the armature magnets 68 by the
stator magnets thereby controlling the speed of rotation of the
armature.

As will be noted from FIGS. 4-7 and 9 and 10, an air gap exists
between the armature magnet or magnets and the stator magnets
and the dimension of this spacing, effects the magnitude of the
forces imposed upon the armature magnet or magnets. If the
distance between the armature magents, and the stator magnets is
reduced the forces imposed upon the armature magnets by the
stator magnets are increased, and the resultant force vector
tending to displace the armature magnets in their path of
movement increases. However, the decreasing of the spacing
between the armature and stator magnets creates a "pulsation" in
the movement of the armature magnets which is objectionable, but
can be, to some extent, minimized by using a plurality of
armature magnets. The increasing of the distance between the
armature and stator magnets reduces the pulsation tendency of
the armature magnet, but also reduces the magnitude of the
magnetic forces imposed upon the armature magnets. Thus, the
most effective spacing between the armature magnets. Thus, the
most effective spacing between the armature and stator magnets
is that spacing which produces the maximum force vector in the
direction of armature magnet movement, with a minimum creation
of objectionable pulsation.

In the disclosed embodiments the high permeability plate 20 and
sleeve 56 are disclosed for concentrating the magnetic field of
the stator magnets, and the armature magnets are bowed and have
shaped ends for magnetic field concentration purposes. While
such magnetic field concentration means result in higher forces
imposed upon the armature magnets for given magnet intensities,
it is not intended that the inventive concepts be limited to the
use of such magnetic field concentrating means.

As will be appreciated from the above description of the
invention, the movement of the armature magnet or magnets
resultsfrom the described relationship of components. The length
of the armature magnets as related to the width of the stator
magnets and spacing therebetween, the dimension of the air gap
and the configuration of the magnetic field, combined, produce
the desired result and motion. The inventive concepts may be
practiced even though these relationships may be varied within
limits not yet defined and the invention is intended to
encompass all dimensional relationships which achieve the
desired goal of armature movement. By way of example, with
respect to FIGS. 4-7, the following dimensions were used in an
operating prototype:

The length of armature magnet 24 is 31/8", the stator magnets
12 are 1" wide, 1/4" thick and 4" long and grain oriented. The
air gap between the poles of the armature magnet and the stator
magnets is approximately 11/2" and the spacing between the
stator magnets is approximately 1/2" inch.

In effect, the stator magnets define a magnetic field track of
a single polarity transversely interrupted at spaced locations
by the magnetic fields produced by the lines of force existing
between the poles of the stator magnets and the unidirectional
force exerted on the armature magnet is a result of the
repulsion and attraction forces existing as the armature magnet
traverses this magnetic field track.

It is to be understood that the inventive concept embraces an
arrangement wherein the armature magnet component is stationary
and the stator assembly is supported for movement and
constitutes the moving component, and other variations of the
inventive concept will be apparent to those skilled in the art
without departing from the scope thereof. As used herein the
term "track" is intended to include both linear and circular
arrangements of the static magnets, and the "direction" or
"length" of the track is that direction parallel or concentric
to the intended direction of armature magnet movement.

---



**United States Patent  4,877,983**

**Magnetic Force Generating Method &
Apparatus**

**Howard R. Johnson**

( October 31, 1989 )

**Abstract ---** A permanent magnet armature is
magnetically propelled along a guided path by interaction with
the field within a flux zone limited on either side of the path
by an arrangement of permanent stator magnets.

Inventors:  Johnson; Howard R. (Box 199, 314 N. Main,
Blacksburg, VA 24060)   
Appl. No.:  799618   ~  Filed: 
November 19, 1985

Current U.S. Class: 310/12; 310/152 // Intern'l Class: 
H02K 041/00   
Field of Search:  310/152,12,46

References Cited:   
U.S. Patent Documents   
USP # 4,074,153 (Feb., 1978) Baker, et al. (Cl. 310/12).   
USP # 4,151,431 (Apr., 1979) Johnson (Cl. 310/12).

Primary Examiner: Skudy; R.    ~  
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Fleit, Jacobson, Cohn, Price, Holman
& Stern

**Claims**

What is claimed as new is as follows:

1. In combination with a movable armature, means for guiding
movement of the armature along a predetermined path and a
permanent armature magnet having magnetic poles of opposite
polarity spaced from each other along said path to establish a
magnetic field of limited extent movable with the armature and
magnetic stator means for establishing a stationary magnetic
flux zone along said path, the improvement comprising flux
emitting surfaces of one polarity mounted on the stator means on
opposite sides of said path for limiting said flux zone through
which said path extends and means mounting the permanent
armature magnet on the armature with the poles thereof
orientated relative to said flux emitting surfaces on the stator
means for unidirectionally propelling the armature along said
path through the limited zone in response to magnetic
interaction between the movable magnetic field and the limited
flux zone, said magnetic stator means including a plurality of
magnetic gate assemblies fixedly spaced from each other along
said path and respectively establishing stationary magnetic
fields, each of said gate assemblies including a plurality of
interconnected bar magnets substantially bordering said limited
flux zone exposing pole faces of opposite polarity in parallel
spaced planes intersected by said path, and magnetic means
connected to said interconnected bar magnets exposing one of the
flux emitting surfaces of said one polarity perpendicular to
said parallel planes for magnetic interaction of the stationary
magnetic fields.

2. The combination of claim 1 wherein said armature magnet is
curved between end faces at which said poles of opposite
polarity are located, the end faces being orientated by the
mounting means in converging relation to each other toward the
guiding means.

3. In combination with a movable armature, means for guiding
movement of the armature along a predetermined path and a
permanent armature magnet having magnetic poles of opposite
polarity spaced from each other along said path to establish a
magnetic field of limited extent movable with the armature and
magnetic stator means for establishing a stationary magnetic
flux zone along said path, the improvement comprising flux
emitting surfaces of one polarity mounted on the stator means on
opposite sides of said path for limiting said flux zone through
which said path extends and means mounting the permanent
armature magnet on the armature with the poles faces thereof
orientated relative to said flux emitting surfaces on the stator
means for unidirectionally propelling the armature along said
path through the limited zone in response to magnetic
interaction between the movable magnetic field and the limited
flux zone, said armature magnet being curved between end faces
at which said poles of opposite polarity are located, the end
faces being orientated by the mounting means in converging
relation to each other toward the guiding means.

4. In combination with a movable armature, means for guiding
movement of the armature along a predetermined path and a
permanent armature magnet having magnetic poles of opposite
polarity spaced from each other along said path to establish a
magnetic field of limited extent movable with the armature and
magnetic stator means for establishing a stationary magnetic
flux zone along said path, the improvement comprising flux
emitting surfaces of one polarity mounted on the stator means on
opposite sides of said path for limiting said flux zone through
which said path extends and means mounting the permanent
armature magnet on the armature with the poles thereof
orientated relative to said flux emitting surfaces on the stator
means for unidirectionally propelling the armature along said
path through the limited zone in response to magnetic
interaction between the movable magnetic field and the limited
flux zone, said magnetic stator means including a pair of
permanent magnet assemblies having continuous, confronting pole
faces of said one polarity bordering said limited zone, each of
said assemblies having means for varying magnetic field
intensity in the flux zone along said path, and a second
armature magnet connected to the first mentioned armature magnet
in mirror image relation thereto.

5. The combination of claim 4 wherein said armature magnet is
curved between end faces at which said poles of opposite
polarity are located, the end faces being orientated by the
mounting means in a plane parallel to said path.

6. In combination with a movable armature, means for guiding
movement of the armature along a predetermined path and a
permanent armature magnet mounted on the armature having
magnetic poles of opposite polarity spaced from each other along
said path, the improvement comprising a plurality of permanent
magnet gate assemblies mounted in spaced relation to each other
along said path establishing interacting stationary magnetic
fields along said path, each of said assemblies including stator
magnets interconnected in surrounding relation to said path and
having pole faces of opposite polarity aligned with parallel
planes intersected by said path and magnetic means fixed to the
pole faces aligned with one of the parallel planes for
interaction of the armature magnet with said stationary magnetic
fields for unidirectional propulsion of the armature along said
path, said magnetic means being an annular magnet having a
radially inner pole surface of one polarity enclosing a magnetic
flux zone through which said path extends.

**Description**

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates in general to the use of permanent
magnets to generate unidirectional propelling forces.

The generation of unidirectional propelling forces by permanent
magnets is already known and recognized in U.S. Pat. Nos.
4,151,431 and 4,215,330 to Johnson and Hartmen, respectively, by
way of example. According to applicant's own prior Pat. No.
4,151,431, such forces are generated by magnetic interaction
between a curved magnet bar of an armature guided for movement
along a circular path and an arrangement of spaced stator
magnets having pole faces of one polarity facing the armature on
one side thereof parallel to the path of movement.

It is therefore an important object of the present invention to
provide certain improved stator arrangements of permanent
magnets interacting with a permanent magnet armature for
unidirectional propulsion thereof in a novel manner believed to
be more efficient.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In accordance with the present invention, the armature magnet
is guided along a path through a magnetic flux zone limited on
opposite sides of the path by an arrangement of magnetic pole
surfaces of one polarity on stator magnets. According to one
embodiment, the flux zone is formed by spaced gate assemblies of
magnets having exposed pole faces of one polarity in a plane
perpendicular to the armature path from which a magnetic field
extends to the opposite pole faces and a ring magnet fixed to
such opposite pole faces of the other polarity, with a radially
inner pole surface of the same polarity producing a magnetic
field perpendicular to the first mentioned field to their
opposite radially outer pole surfaces.

According to another embodiment, the flux zone is formed
between continuous confronting pole surfaces of one polarity on
stator magnets arranged to produce a magnetic field of varying
intensity along the armature path.

In yet another embodiment, at least two curved bar magnets are
interconnected to form the armature with two pairs of pole faces
spaced along the armature path.

These together with other objects and advantages which will
become subsequently apparent reside in the details of
construction and operation as more fully hereinafter described
and claimed, reference being had to the accompanying drawings
forming a part hereof, wherein like numerals refer to like parts
throughout.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE
DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a somewhat
schematic side elevational view showing an installation of the
present invention in accordance with one embodiment, with parts
broken away and shown in section.

![](2fig1.gif)

FIG. 2 is a transverse
sectional view taken substantially through a plane indicated by
section line 2--2 in FIG. 1.

![](2fig2.gif)

FIG. 3 is an enlarged partial sectional view taken
substantially through a plane indicated by section line 3--3 in
FIG. 1.

![](2fig3.gif)

FIG. 4 is a top plan view of an installation in accordance with
another embodiment of the invention.

![](2fig4.gif)

FIG. 5 is a sectional view taken substantially through a plane
indicated by section line 5--5 in FIG. 4.

![](2fig5.gif)

FIG. 6 is a sectional view taken substantially through a plane
indicated by section line 5--5 in FIG. 5.

![](2fig6.gif)

FIG. 7 is a simplified side view through the flux zone shown in
FIGS. 4, 5 and 6 with the armature bar magnet positioned
therein.

![](2fig7.gif)

FIG. 8 is a top plan view of an installation in accordance with
yet another embodiment.

![](2fig8.gif)

FIG. 9 is an enlarged partial sectional view through a plane
indicated by section line 9--9 in FIG. 8.

![](2fig9.gif)

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Referring now to the drawings in detail, FIG. 1 illustrates one
embodiment of the invention in which a magnetic armature
generally referred to by reference numeral 10 is
unidirectionally propelled along a predetermined path
established by a motion guiding track 12 fixed to a frame or
support 14. The path is represented by a line 16 extending
through pole faces 18 and 20 of opposite polarity at the
longitudinal ends of a curved armature bar magnet 22. The
armature 10 in the illustrated example includes a wheeled
vehicle mount 24 to which the armature magnet 22 is fixedly
secured with the pole faces 18 and 20 converging toward the
guiding track 12. The pole faces 18 and 20 are furthermore
orientated so that the magnetic field extending between pole
faces 18 and 20 is movable therewith within a flux zone 26
limited in surrounding relation to the guided path at spaced
locations by stator gate assemblies 28 formed by permanent
magnets fixed to the frame support 14.

Each of the stator gate assemblies 28 as shown in FIGS. 1-3,
includes four bar magnets 30 interconnected at corners by
non-magnetic elements 32, such as triangular wooden blocks as
more clearly seen in FIG. 3, to form a rectangular enclosure in
surrounding relation to the track 12. Pole faces 34 and 36
between which a stationary magentic field extends are formed on
the bar magnets substantially aligned with parallel spaced
planes in perpendicular intersecting relation to the path line
16. The pole face 34 of one polarity (north) is effective
through its magnetic field to magnetically interact with the
magnetic field of the armature magnet 22 causing unidirectional
propulsion of the armature 10 as actually observed during tests.
Such magnetic interaction is obviously influenced by the pole
face 36 of opposite polarity (south) abutting and fixed to an
annular or circular ring magnet 38 magnets 30. The
interconnected and 38 may be held in assembled relation by an
outer skin or sheathing 40 as shown in FIG. 3.

The ring magnet 38 has a radially inner pole surface 42 of the
same polarity (north) as that of the pole faces 34 to interact
with the other pole faces 36 as aforementioned, to the exclusion
of the radially outer pole surface 44. The obvious effect of
said arrangement is to exert a net magnetic force on the
armature magnet 22 causing the observed continuous,
unidirectional propulsion thereof through the gate assemblies
28. Such assemblies 28 are spaced apart distance dependent on
the magnetic field intensity or strength of the permanent
magnets 30 and 38 which dictate the effective axial extent of
the aforementioned magnetic fields associated with the
assemblies 28 and the armature magnet 22.

FIGS. 4-7 illustrate another embodiment of the invention
utilizing the same type of movable armature 10 guided along a
predetermined path by a frame mounted track 12 extending through
a flux zone 46 established by another type of permanent magnet
stator arrangement, generally referred to by reference numeral
48. The stator 48 includes a pair of permanent magnet assemblies
50 extending in parallel spaced relation to each other on
opposite sides of the armature path established by the track 12.
Each assembly 50 is a mirror image of the other so as to expose
continuous confronting pole surfaces formed by a magnetic layer
material 52 such as Neodynium, mounted on interconnected ceramic
bodies 54. The confronting pole surfaces of the magnetic layers
52 are of like polarity (north), opposite to the polarity of the
pole surface of magnetic layer sections 56 and 58 made of
Samarium Cobalt, for example, and carried on the ceramic bodies
54. The bodies 54 have transversely extending flange portions 60
at the abutting ends so as to mount the layer sections sections
58 laterally outwardly of layer sections 56 as more clearly seen
in FIGS. 4 and 6 to thereby vary the magnetic field intensity
along the guided armature path within the limited flux zone 46
in which the magnetic fields of the stator assembly 48 interact
with the magnetic field of bar magnet 22.

The curved armature magnet 22 is orientated within the flux
zone 46 between the confronting pole surfaces on 52 as depicted
in FIG. 7, with the pole faces 18 and 20 converging toward the
track 12 as previously described in connection with FIGS. 1-3.
However, it was found that maximum propelling thrust is produced
by optimum location of the path line 16 through the pole faces
18 and 20 a distance 62 closer to the upper edge of surface
layer 52 than the lower edge on the frame support 14.

FIGS. 8 and 9 illustrate yet another embodiment of the
invention involving the same type of permanent magnet stator
arrangement 50 as described with respect to FIGS. 4-7. a
modified form of armature 10' is featured in FIGS. 8 and 9,
including two curved armature magnets 64 that are mirror images
of each other with respect to an intermediate abutting portion
66. The magnets 64 are interconnected at the abutting portion 66
in alignment with a plane containing the path line 16 centrally
between the confronting pole surfaces on 52. The end pole faces
68 and 70 for each magnet 64, are aligned with a plane in
parallel spaced relation between the path line 16 and the pole
surface on 52. With the number of pole faces thereby doubled for
the armature, a higher and more efficient propelling thrust may
be achieved.

The foregoing is considered as illustrative only of the
principles of the invention. Further, since numerous
modifications and changes will readily occur to those skilled in
the art, it is not desired to limit the invention to the exact
construction and operation shown and described, and accordingly,
all suitable modifications and equivalents may be restorted to,
falling within the scope of the invention.

---



**US Patent # 5,402,021**

**Magnetic Propulsion System**

**Howard R. Johnson**

( March 28, 1995 )

**Abstract ---** A magnetic propulsion system including a
plurality of specifically arranged permanent magnets and a
magnetic vehicle propelled thereby along a path defined by the
permanent magnets. The magnetic vehicle which is to be propelled
includes a rigidly attached armature comprising several curved
magnets. The propulsion system further includes two parallel
walls of permanent magnets arranged so as to define the lateral
sides of a vehicle path. Preferably, the walls are identical to
one another except that the polarities of the magnets which
define one wall are opposite from the polarities of the
corresponding magnets in the opposite wall. A first wall, for
example, includes a series of generally rectangular magnets,
each magnet arranged with a North-to-South axis pointing
longitudinally down the wall in the intended direction of
vehicle travel. Each of the rectangular magnets is separated
from the next successive rectangular magnet by a thinner magnet,
which thinner magnet is arranged with its North-to-South axis
pointing laterally toward the opposite wall and therefore
perpendicular with respect to the North-to-South axis of the
rectangular magnets. The opposite (or second) wall includes the
same general arrangement of magnets, except that the
North-to-South axis for each of the generally rectangular
magnets is in a direction opposite from the direction of vehicle
travel and the North-to-South axis of the thinner magnets points
away from the first wall. In addition, the propulsion system
includes several spin accelerators.

Inventors:  Johnson; Howard R. (1440 Harding Rd.,
Blacksburg, VA 24060)   
Appl. No.:  064930  ~  Filed:  May 24, 1993

Current U.S. Class: 310/12; 198/619; 310/152   
Intern'l Class:  B65G 035/06; H02K 041/00   
Field of Search:  310/12,152,46 198/619,805

References Cited [Referenced By]

U.S. Patent Documents:   
4,151,431 ~  Aug., 1979 ~ Johnson (Cl. 310/12).   
4,215,330 ~ Jun., 1980 ~  Hartman (335/306).   
4,877,983 ~ Oct., 1989  ~ Johnson (310/12).

Other References:   
*Advances in Permanent Magnetism*, pp. 44-57 date unknown.
  
*Scientific American*, Jan. 1989, pp. 90-97.   
*Introduction to Magnetic Materials*, pp. 129-135 date
unknown.   
*Applications of Magnetism*, pp. 42-47 date unknown.

**Description**

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a magnetic propulsion system
including a plurality of specifically arranged permanent magnets
and a magnetic vehicle propelled thereby along a path defined by
the permanent magnets.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The generation of unidirectional propelling forces by permanent
magnets is already known and recognized in U.S. Pat. Nos.
4,151,431 and 4,877,983 to Johnson, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,215,330
to Hartmen, by way of example. According to applicant's first
patent (U.S. Pat. No. 4,151,431), such forces are generated by
magnetic interaction between a curved magnet bar of an armature
guided for movement along a circular path and an arrangement of
spaced stator magnets having pole faces of one polarity facing
the armature on one side thereof parallel to the path of
movement.

According to applicant's second patent (U.S. Pat. No.
4,877,983), the armature magnet is mounted on a vehicle and
guided along a path through a magnetic flux zone limited on
opposite sides of the path by an arrangement of magnetic pole
surfaces of one polarity on stator magnets. According to one
embodiment of the second patent, the flux zone is formed by
spaced gate assemblies of magnets having exposed pole faces of
one polarity in a plane perpendicular to the armature path from
which a magnetic field extends to the opposite pole faces and a
ring magnet fixed to such opposite pole faces of the other
polarity, with a radially inner pole surface of the same
polarity producing a magnetic field perpendicular to the first
mentioned field to their opposite radially outer pole surfaces.
Several other embodiments are illustrated including variations
in the armature structure and in the stator structure; however,
all of the embodiments teach use of an annular stator assembly.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide
an improved magnetic propulsion system having a plurality of
permanent magnets and a magnetic vehicle propelled thereby along
a path defined by the permanent magnets, wherein the permanent
magnets need not encircle the path of the magnetic vehicle.

In order to achieve this and other objects, the present
invention comprises two parallel walls of permanent magnets
arranged so as to define the lateral sides of a vehicle path.
The walls are identical to one another except that the
polarities of the magnets which define one wall are opposite
from the polarities of the corresponding magnets in the opposite
wall.

A first wall, for example, includes a series of generally
rectangular magnets, each magnet arranged with a North-to-South
axis pointing longitudinally down the wall in the intended
direction of vehicle travel. Each of the rectangular magnets is
separated from the next successive rectangular magnet by a
thinner magnet, which thinner magnet is arranged with its
North-to-South axis pointing laterally toward the opposite wall
and therefore perpendicular with respect to the North-to-South
axis of the rectangular magnets.

The pole-to-pole length of each thinner magnet is preferably no
more than half the width of the generally rectangular magnets.
Accordingly, a gap on the inside surface of the wall is defined
by the presence of each thinner magnet.

The opposite (or second) wall includes the same general
arrangement of magnets, except that the North-to-South axis for
each of the generally rectangular magnets is in a direction
opposite from the direction of vehicle travel and the
North-to-South axis of the thinner magnets points away from the
first wall.

In addition, the propulsion system of the present invention
includes several spin accelerators for crowding the magnetic
fields at predetermined positions along the length of the walls.
This crowding of the magnetic fields serves to intensify the
fields and causes the vehicle's armature to be accelerated
faster than would otherwise be the case without the spin
accelerators.

The spin accelerators project laterally outward from each of
the walls at predetermined positions along the longitudinal
length of each wall. Each spin accelerator comprises a generally
rectangular permanent magnet which is preferably identical to
that of the first and second walls. Each spin accelerator
further includes a shorter magnet having a smaller pole-to-pole
length than that of the generally rectangular magnet and a wedge
separating the generally rectangular magnet of the spin
accelerator from the shorter magnet.

The orientation of the generally rectangular magnet in the spin
accelerator is determined by which pole of the wall's thinner
magnet is facing outwardly. The rectangular magnet's orientation
is such that face-to-face contact is established between
opposite poles of the generally rectangular magnet in the spin
accelerator and the thinner magnet in the wall. Accordingly, the
North-to-South axis of the generally rectangular magnet in the
spin accelerator points in the same direction as the
North-to-South axis of the thinner magnet in the wall. The
shorter magnet in the spin accelerator is likewise arranged with
its North-to-South axis pointing in the same general direction
as that of the thinner magnet in the wall; but here, an acute
angular tilt away from the North-to-South axis of the thinner
magnet is established by the wedge. In particular, the angle of
the wedge determines the acute angle which exists between the
North-to-South axis of the shorter magnet in the spin
accelerator and the North-to-South axis of the thinner magnet in
the wall.

The magnetic vehicle which is to be propelled by the instant
propulsion system includes a rigidly attached armature
comprising several curved magnets. Each curved magnet is
arranged on the vehicle such that its North-to-South axis is
parallel with respect to that of the other curved magnets. In
particular, the North-to-South axes of all the curved magnets
point in the same direction as the North-to-South axes of the
thinner magnets in each wall. The vehicle itself is preferably a
wheeled vehicle mounted on a track; however, it is understood
that other vehicle structures will suffice so long as the
vehicle is maintained between the walls of the propulsion
system.

In operation, the magnetic fields created by the two walls
exert a propelling force on the armature of the vehicle in the
desired direction of travel. Since the armature of the vehicle
is rigidly attached to the vehicle, the vehicle itself begins to
accelerate and is hence set in motion by the propulsion system.

Preferably, the curved magnets of the vehicle armature are
"Alnico 8" magnets tipped with neodymium magnets. The magnets
which constitute the walls and spin accelerators are preferably
made of neodymium and ceramic material, except for the thinner
magnets. The thinner magnets are preferably made of rubber or
plastic, and each can comprise a plurality of magnetic rubber or
plastic layers.

Although the present invention has been described with regard
to generally rectangular magnets, it is understood that other
permanent magnet shapes will suffice, including but not limited
to generally cylindrical shapes.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING

FIG. 1 is a schematic plan view of a magnetic propulsion system
in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present
invention.

![](1fig1.gif)

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

With reference to FIG. 1, a preferred embodiment of the
inventive magnetic propulsion system and vehicle propelled
thereby will now be described.

FIG. 1 schematically illustrates a propulsion system 10
comprising two parallel magnetic walls 12,14 which are
stationary, and an armature 16 rigidly attached to a vehicle 18.
The two parallel walls 12,14 are formed from several permanent
magnets arranged so as to define the lateral sides of a vehicle
path. The desired direction of vehicle travel is indicated by an
arrow A in FIG. 1. The two walls 12,14 are identical to one
another except that the polarities of the magnets which define
one wall 12 are opposite from the polarities of the
corresponding magnets in the opposite wall 14. A first wall 12,
for example, includes a series of generally rectangular magnets
20, each magnet arranged with a North-to-South axis pointing
longitudinally down the wall in the intended direction of
vehicle travel (indicated by arrow A). Each of the magnets 20
preferably comprises a ceramic magnet with a neodymium north
pole. In addition, each of the generally rectangular magnets 20
is separated from the next successive rectangular magnet 20 by a
thinner magnet 22. The thinner magnets 22 are arranged with
their North-to-South axes pointing laterally toward the opposite
wall 14 and therefore perpendicular with respect to the
North-to-South axis of the rectangular magnets 20. Each thinner
magnet 22 is preferably made from rubber or plastic permanently
magnetic material. Also, the pole-to-pole length of each thinner
magnet 22 is preferably no more than half the width of the
generally rectangular magnets 20. Consequently, a gap 24 on the
inside surface of the wall 12 is defined by the presence of each
thinner magnet 22.

The opposite (or second) wall 14 includes the same general
arrangement of magnets 20,22, except that the North-to-South
axis for each of the generally rectangular magnets 20 points in
a direction opposite from the direction of vehicle travel, while
the North-to-South axes of the thinner magnets 22 point away
from the first wall 12.

By arranging the thinner magnets 22 between the generally
rectangular magnets 20 in the foregoing manner, there is a pole
shading effect on the magnets 20 of the walls 12,14.

In addition, the propulsion system 10 of the preferred
embodiment includes several spin accelerators 26 for crowding
the magnetic fields at predetermined positions along the length
of the walls 12,14. This crowding of the magnetic fields serves
to intensify the fields and causes the vehicle's armature to be
accelerated faster than would otherwise be the case without the
spin accelerators.

The spin accelerators 26 project laterally outward from each of
the walls 12,14 at predetermined positions along the
longitudinal length of each wall 12,14. According to the
preferred embodiment, the spin accelerators 26 are positioned
along the walls 12,14 at every other thinner magnet 22 (as is
shown in the middle of FIG. 1). Each spin accelerator 26
comprises a generally rectangular permanent magnet 28 which is
preferably identical or very similar to that of the first and
second walls 12,14. Each spin accelerator 26 further includes a
shorter magnet 30 having a smaller pole-to-pole length than that
of the generally rectangular magnet 28 and a wedge 32 separating
the generally rectangular magnet 28 of the spin accelerator 26
from the shorter magnet 30. The orientation of the generally
rectangular magnet 28 in the spin accelerator 26 is determined
by which pole of the wall's thinner magnet 22 is facing
outwardly. The rectangular magnet's orientation is such that
face-to-face contact is established between opposite poles of
the generally rectangular magnet 28 in the spin accelerator 26
and the thinner magnet 22 in the wall 12,14. Accordingly, the
North-to-South axis of the generally rectangular magnet 28 in
the spin accelerator 26 points in the same direction as the
North-to-South axis of the thinner magnet 22 in the wall 12,14.
The shorter magnet 30 in the spin accelerator 26 is likewise
arranged with its North-to-South axis pointing in the same
general direction as that of the thinner magnet 22 in the wall
12,14; but here, an acute angular tilt away from the
North-to-South axis of the thinner magnet 22 is established by
the wedge 32. In particular, the angle .alpha. of the wedge
determines the acute angle which exists between the
North-to-South axis of the shorter magnet 30 and the
North-to-South axis of the thinner magnet 22 in the wall 12,14.
The shorter magnet 30 preferably consists of neodymium.

The magnetic vehicle 18 which is to be propelled by the instant
propulsion system 10 includes a rigidly attached armature 16
comprising several curved magnets 34. Each curved magnet 34 is
arranged on the vehicle 18 such that its North-to-South axis is
parallel with respect to that of the other curved magnets 34. In
particular, the North-to-South axes of all the curved magnets 34
point in the same direction as the North-to-South axes of the
thinner magnets 22 in each wall 12,14. The vehicle 18 itself,
according to the preferred embodiment, is a wheeled vehicle
mounted on a track 36. It is understood, however, that other
vehicle structures will suffice so long as the vehicle is
maintained between the walls 12,14 of the propulsion system 10.

In operation, when the vehicle 18 is positioned as is shown in
FIG. 1, the magnetic fields created by the two walls 12,14 exert
a propelling force on the armature 16 of the vehicle 18 in the
desired direction of travel (arrow A). Since the armature 16 is
rigidly attached to the vehicle 18, the vehicle 18 itself begins
to accelerate and hence is set in motion by the propulsion
system 10.

Furthermore, since the spin accelerators 26 serve to crowd and
thereby intensify the magnetic fields at predetermined positions
along the walls 12,14, the acceleration of the vehicle is
enhanced as the vehicle passes these predetermined positions.

The spin accelerators 26 can be reversed in order to lessen
their effectiveness at crowding the magnetic fields. Reversing
of the spin accelerators 26 can be accomplished by rotating the
spin accelerators 26 so that the shorter magnets 30 tilt away
from the intended direction of vehicle travel, rather than in
the direction of travel as is the case for the illustrated
embodiment.

Preferably, the curved magnets 34 of the vehicle armature 16
are "Alnico 8" magnets tipped with neodymium magnets, while the
wedges 32 comprise wood or similar material and an angle .alpha.
of 45 to 90 degrees.

The width w.sub.20, height, and pole-to-pole length 1.sub.20 of
the generally rectangular magnets 20 in each wall 12,13 are 0.75
inches to 1.25 inches, 3.75 to 4.25 inches, and 1.25 inches to
1.75 inches, respectively. The width w.sub.22, height, and
pole-to-pole length 1.sub.22 of the thinner magnets 22 in the
walls 12,14 are 1 inch to 1.5 inches, 3.75 inches to 4.25
inches, and no more than one half the width w.sub.20 of the
generally rectangular magnets, respectively. In the spin
accelerators 26, the width w.sub.28, height, and pole-to-pole
length 1.sub.28 of the generally rectangular magnets 28 are
1.125 to 1.625 inches, 3.75 to 4.25 inches, and 0.875 inches to
1.375 inches, respectively, while the width w.sub.32, height,
and pole-to-pole length 1.sub.32 of the shorter magnets 30 are
0.75 inch to 1.25 inches, 3.75 inches to 4.25 inches, and 0.125
inch to 0.375 inch, respectively.

Preferably, the distance separating the walls 12,14, is such
that each wall 12,14 is 0.5 inch to 1.25 inches away from the
tips of the armature magnets 34, both walls 12,14 being
equidistant from the tips of the armature 16. Also, the curved
magnets 34 of the armature 16 are preferably 0.375 inch to 0.625
inch apart from one another.

Testing of the foregoing prototype propulsion system resulted
in the vehicle moving 2 feet in one second.

Although the present invention has been described with
reference to a preferred embodiment, it is understood that
various modifications to this embodiment will become
subsequently apparent to those having ordinary skill in the art.
In this regard, the scope of the invention is limited only by
the claims appended hereto, and not by the illustrated
embodiment.

---

**Tom Bearden Comments**   
( Cribbed from www.greaterthings.com )

**From**: "Karl" <krlbrgmnn@mailandnews.com>   
**To**: "Sterling D. Allan, PerenTech.com"
<sterlingda@perentech.com>   
**Sent**: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:01 PM   
**Subject**: Truth about Howard Johnson and his motor

Sterling,

Just a quick note to let you know I spoke to Tom Bearden today
and, regarding the statement on your webpage by your "anonymous
source" who said "Howard Johnson never was able to get the
rotary version to work.  He was only able to get the linear
version working, and there were some questions about its
viability.", Tom said such a person doesn't know what they are
talking about.  I'd say Tom is in the best position to
know, since he and Howard have been friends for decades and
Howard has personally brought a functional, rotary PMM to Tom's
house, and they've played with it for hours.  Next to
Howard himself, I'd consider Tom to be the best resource on the
subject of HJ's PMM.

He also said that Howard is still working on getting another
functioning unit constructed (he's had numerous setbacks over
the years after his working unit was vandalized by thieves that
broke into Howard's shop and stole only the magnets off that
model, leaving many $K worth of other material nearby
untouched).  Howard is still plugging away every day, at
over 70 years old, but his wife's health problems are keeping
him busy.  However, he has gotten hooked up with a
respectable, honest businessman who is financing him and Howard
also now has some younger help to do the grunt work that is
becoming tougher for him.  All in all, Tom hopes to see
some real progress being made for Howard in the next year or so.

Tom mentioned that there are a few critical things that anyone
who wants to successfully build a working HJ PMM needs to know,
some of which are probably obvious to the more experienced
builders:

1) The most critical element is the precise machining of the
magnets.  Joe Q. Public, with his diamond saw, cutting his
own magnets by hand has little chance of succeeding in shaping
the magnets to the aerospace-critical specs that are the minimum
necessary, much less duplicating that feat several times for
each necessary part.

2) Alignment of the parts is highly important too.  One
slight misalignment and the motor will not run continuously.

3) All magnets aren't the same.  This application requires
expensive, extremely high quality magnets.  Howard, in
order to get them cheaper, was buying them in $50K lots from
China, where high quality and a lower price can be had.

I also spoke with a gentleman named Gary Hanson who had been in
touch with Howard years ago when Gary was trying to build
Howard's motor.  Howard told him, as I think most
researchers on this know now, that the motor \*can\* be build
directly from the patent but that there needs to be 5 or 6
armtures and not just the one that is shown as an illustration
in the patent.  Just want to make sure any newbies
understand this.

I hope some of this has helped clear up any misunderstandings
for those of us interested in building a functional HJ
PMM.  My opinion is that, if you want to do it right, go to
the horse's mouth (Howard) or else as close as you can possibly
get (Tom).  Hopefully, doing so will enable us to make this
motor a reality.

Regards, Karl

---

**Tom Bearden: *Chasing the Wild Dragon*  
[**Excerpts from www.cheniere.org ]

Howard Johnson is also a respected colleague, whom I very much
admire. (See Figure 23). Howard has continued to work quietly
and patiently upon his patented permanent magnet motor, [note
31] including patenting various magnetic gates, etc. that are
necessary to make such a motor work in a rotary configuration.
[note 32] Howard employs a two-particle theory of magnetism;
i.e., each magnetic flux line is envisioned as having a particle
traveling from the north pole to the south pole, and also a
particle traveling from the south pole to the north pole. The
particles are spinning; the forward-time particle spins in one
direction, and the antiparticle spins in the other direction.
Howard then slightly separates the two particle flows. [note 33]
In other words, Johnson splits the flux lines themselves, into
two different pieces. When so separated, the component lines are
now curls, so their paths curve. The paths of the two "curl
particles" are different; one curls in one direction and the
other curls in the opposite direction. Further, a predominance
of one form of curl particle gives a "time-forward" aspect,
while a predominance of the other form of curl particle gives a
"time-reversed" aspect. Johnson is thus able to employ a deeper
kind of magnetism than the textbooks presently contain. He
demonstrates that a "spin-altered" magnetic assembly exhibiting
(to a compass or other such detector) a north polarity can
attract another unaltered magnetic assembly exhibiting a north
polarity. In short, he can make a north pole attract a north
pole. We will give you further insight into Johnson's
two-particle theory in a future article. [note 34] We will also
explain how and why the physicists missed that antiparticle in
the magnetic field's flux lines, and thereby failed to advance
the theory of magnetism to a deeper level. Make no mistake, one
day when the new theory is done, Johnson may well be awarded a
Nobel Prize for his epochal discovery of a deeper structure of
magnetism.

*Footnotes:*

[32] I personally saw and closely examined one demonstration
rotary Johnson permanent magnet motor some years ago, and toyed
with it for about one hour. It would definitely self- rotate as
long as you wished to permit it to turn. It was not a powerful
device at all, but just a small laboratory "proof of principle"
prototype. It had cost Johnson an enormous amount of time,
labor, and optimization to get the critical adjustment required
of his two magnet assemblies. But the device had no power source
other than the permanent magnet assemblies themselves. Johnson's
nonlinear rotor and stator magnets interacted with each other in
a manner to break local symmetry. So his machine was an open
system and therefore a permissible overunity device; it was not
a perpetuum mobile.

[33] As I have pointed out repeatedly in the past, photons also
carry time, not just energy. We have previously shown the
process and the photon interaction mechanism that creates the
flow of time itself; we will discuss this mechanism in the
future. So when Johnson separates the particles and
antiparticles, not only does he partially separate them
according to spin, but he also alters the local character of
time flow during which the resulting magnetic field forces must
appear. In other words, he accomplishes a partial separation of
time-forward and time- reversed polar interactions. A south pole
is just a time- reversed magnetic north pole, in the first
place! So a north pole of a bar magnet that is slightly time
reversed on one side will partially act on that side just like a
south pole. On the other side it will continue to act like a
normal north pole. By partially time-reversing (phase
conjugating) one side of the north magnetic pole piece, Johnson
makes that side look and act like a south pole. that way Howard
is able to create two north poles, one on a stator and the other
on a rotor, and time-reverse part of one face of the stator's
north magnetic pole-piece. Therefore when the proper sides of
the stator and rotor north poles are facing, they attract each
other, contrary to the conventional textbook. The two poles then
repel each other normally as soon as the north rotor poles
passes the north stator pole. Hence Johnson can make a
surrounding north pole stator assembly "draw in" an approaching
north pole rotor assembly, and then kick it on out the other
side, because he has broken the local magnetic symmetry. In
short, Johnson's magnetic gate can provide a legitimate
component of unidirectional magnetic thrust, which means that he
can indeed make a rotary permanent motor. Simply put, this
"partially separating the spin particles," and thereby partially
phase conjugating one face of a magnet, is what Johnson calls a
"gate," and this is the patented secret by which his magnet
assemblies can be made self-powering. The entire process is
still very meticulous, and assembly and adjustments are
extremely critical. With Johnson's blessings we hope to shed
more light on this subject in coming articles.

[34] For a basic article on rotary permanent magnet motors, see
T.E. Bearden, "On Rotary Permanent Magnet Motors and 'Free'
Energy," *Raum & Zeit*, 1(3): 43-53 (Aug.-Sep. 1989).

---

![](hj1.jpg)

---

  

Liberty Research  
Johnson Motor Construction Plans  
  
[ Click to Enlarge ]

  
  

![](p1.jpg)

![](p2.jpg)

> ---
>
> ![](p3.jpg)

![](p4.jpg)

---

  

![](p5.jpg)

![](motor1.jpg)  
  
Assembled  
  
  
![](motor-chassis.jpg)   
Chassis  
  
  
![](motor-endplate.jpg)     
Endplate  
  
  
![](motor-magshield.jpg)     
Magnetic Shield  
  
  
![](motor-rotor.jpg)     
Motor-Rotor  
  
  
![](motor-rotor-magn.jpg)  
Rotor-Magnet  
  
  
![](motor-rotors.jpg)  
Rotors  
  
  
![](motor-spacingtool.jpg)  
Rotor Magnet Spacing Tool  
  
  
![](motor-stator.jpg)  
Stator  
  
  
![](motor-stator-rotor.jpg)  
Stator-Rotor-Chassis  
  


---