PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?

[JouleSeeker]

you'll find some better quantified results here, Steven:

  link--> http://home.comcast.net/~onichelson/VOLTGN.pdf


hope this helps
np

http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com

Helps a lot!  I read the reference and found it well done.   This should be published (IMO) in a technical journal!  What an exciting result.  I've attached the last part of the report here for easy reference.

[JouleSeeker]

Thanks for comments!

@Jouleseeker . I too tried the bifilar electromagnet experiments a couple of days ago , see the Muller thread . The nail pickup tests are crude to say the least , and results vary from one experiment to the next .What I can definitely say , is that bifilar ALWAYS picks up more nails , varying between say 25% extra , and up to 3 times as many . I found that a quadrifilar wound coil was better than a normal wind , but not better than a bifilar . If you get time , please try a quadfilar . It is hard to see how a difference in the capacitance or inductance of the wind would have an effect on a DC circuit , and we have been told that field strength is proportional to Amp-turns . Somewhere , I read a theory that with less inductance , The "rise time" of the field was quicker , more like hitting the core with a hammer than a gradual push , resulting in a stronger field .What do you think ?

Thanks for your experimental results, Neptune.  Very interesting that different tries give different results, with bifilar B-field strength always greater than single-wound. 

@Neptune and @Xee2:  Note that in the report posted above, with actual measurements of inductance in the two windings, the inductances are nearly the same:
208 and 205 uH. 
So I don't think that a small variation in inductance is what is causing this large observed difference in B-field strength.

Actually (Xee2), the single-wound had the higher L (so your explanation appears to fail).

@Pirate: 

I am going back to bifilar because I believe it gives some unique properties that can not be achieved any other way.

Bill

I'm inclined to agree, based on the empirical results we're seeing! 
Lot's to understand in this simple experiment (above).

[frankly]

Hello all. It has been a few years since I entered here but I see the whole game is still afoot, and only now, when someone shows the fact that energy from a battery, when applied to both ends of a core at once, produces a stronger magnetic field, do you begin to question whether you might have missed something really, really important.

Indeed, you have.

The answer to your present quandry lies in the core. At the core.

Tesla used, not only bifilar winds and such, he also used an entirely different energy signature.

This was derived from, first, a homopolar generator and then, from a DC generator based upon the same principles as the operation of the Homopolar.

Also, Tesla utilised condensors. NOT capacitors. They are two very different things.

A condensor can best be described as an element which absorbs and releases amperage. Lots of it. Quickly.

This allowed his devices to ring quite differently than with voltage alone, which you will get with capacitors.

What the present circuit is touching upon is energy amplification. However, without any understanding of exactly what energy is, you will never catch your tail.

I know this sounds abrasive. Coming from my perspective, I mean it. I posted some things here a while back, in another thread and was shouted down. These have been deleted I see.

Now, years later, the thoughts of the many are beginning to come to where I was then.

The "Rotating Magnetic Field" Tesla utilised was not a mechanical device. Rather, it was an area of polarisation in a core.

In doing so, a coil in proximity received the signature and converted the magnetic flux into energy as if a solid magnet passed by.

However, with the present geometry, all you will get is Transient Spike conversion.

I have been trying for years to explain this simple thing to people, to no avail. Perhaps now, there are ears to hear?

[xee2]

Actually (Xee2), the single-wound had the higher L (so your explanation appears to fail).

I do not have an inductance meter so I can not check this. If the bi-filar coil does not have a higher inductance then this is indeed a mystery.

[xee2]

@ JouleSeeker

Is this how you have the bifilar windings connected?