Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Eddy currents and their implications

Started by frankly, July 08, 2011, 04:04:57 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

frankly

A thought excercise, together with diagrams and experiments designed to unlock the mind.

ramset

Frankly
Your Dialogue thus far has been very intriguing!
The Intent of this forum is to work together 'Open Source' And Bring This World to a better place.

Perhaps you have a light to shine on that path?

Thank you for sharing!

Chet
Whats for yah ne're go bye yah
Thanks Grandma

forest

frankly

If amperage and magnetic field are so closely related then maybe they are both created by the same factor ?
I'm far from connecting  all together but I feel that Joseph Newman shocking theory may be correct. Electrons are small magnets with inertia and current is because of movement of such particles with magnetic momentum. This movement is forced by etheric longitudinal sound-like flow which is the cause of every electric phenomena. So we have situation when electric current is just pure mechanical force at corpuscular scale.Ether pressure move particles with inertia which produce magnetic field.
While this may explain electric current phenomena there is some unknowns :
1. there is possibility of existence of smaller then electron particles with magnetic momentum which push electrons
2. there is possibility that every particle with magnetic momentum is a vortex of ether and that way also large scale magnetic field can exists without particles (scaled up "magnet")
3. EM waves - do they exists ? Tesla thought that Hertz waves are too weak to propagate more then a few miles but we are pumping so much energy into them currently to spread then it may work. Personally I didn't found any clear explanation from Tesla how he saw Hertzian waves. He only stated "they are radiations" and radiations for me suggest corpuscular nature of EM. Connection between longitudinal waves in ether and EM radiation is one of the most important questions for me.

I have also a lot of other important unresolved riddles (for me). ..

forest

frankly - could you move your posts to this thread ? I didn't responded previously because I thought that my thoughts in primitive plain Enslish which is not my native language would not add anything to the overall picture. In fact I have troubles understanding parts of your very interesting description so please bear with me.I found it excellent but not "pure clear", and I'm deeply searching "pure clear" answers - understandable for every person.

ramset

Forest
You are a wonderful person ,Your Sincerity and Zeal for this cause Transcends the language barrier.[Translation 'Your worth your weight in Gold"]

I have posted Frankly's Posts in  order .
Frankly
Quote:
on: July 04, 2011, 07:30:11 PM 
Perhaps I can ask this. What is present in a coil of material to form the B field in the first place? If energy traverses the skin of the wire, what forms the B field? Which part of the material is effected and by how much?

Before you say "the core material", think about an air core coil. Or, even a single wire with no turns.

The B field is caused by the electric component interacting with something. What is that thing and how does this work? What does it mean in regards to "magnetic potential", or in other words, amperage?

Everyone assumes that electricity is the same now as in Tesla's day. It is not.

In fact, it is made now to prevent any possibility of discovering what I am putting forth, which is why it has been so denied. Yes, I can prove that statement. No, I do not have referances, only devices from the early part of the 20'th century in which the circuit elements are different to manage the different energy signature.

There are patents done by Tesla of wiring seguences for generators, and Eric Dollard also did a few drawings of the correct method of energy generation.

But alternators, and rectified energy from these, will not furnish the required energy to establish Tesla's "Rotating magnetic field".

This field is not a motor, nor a winding cage. That is a deception designed to cover the truth.

It is a manufactured state we have now, make no mistake. The trouble is in trying to undo what has been done.

As an example which is easy to do, place two counterwound coils upon a core and energise one with AC energy from the wall. Now, correct me if I am wrong, (as I frequently am), but, a collapsing B field inductiively sends it's energy to the other coil, correct, as they are wound in opposite directions? If the same direction, the building B field would be mirrored in the other coil? So, with counterwound, one should see the opposite B field occur, or a matching polarity. This I built, and, although the second coil delivers 240 volt energy, it has no amperage compared to the input phase. So, in reversing the current, any amperage that was set up in the core, is then removed. All that is left is the reluctance energy. This is a key to understanding where the true energy lies.

Telsa, used oscillating DC and early in the 20'th century, alternators with polyphase energy were used. AC of equal but opposite potentials.

This is far different to today.

This includes batteries and also permanent magnets, (though to a lesser degree).

Reply Quote Notify 

12   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 04, 2011, 05:40:18 AM 
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? 

10   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 05, 2011, 12:40:27 AM 
The main difference between a condensor and a capacitor is one of geometry. I am not sure how the ultra caps are oriented, but, basically, using an element in a resonating circuit to hold and bounce back, the energy, which is specifically designed to clamp resonations, is what you are doing with a capacitor today.

A condenser is either a set of series connected plates, interspaced with either a di-electric medium if negative or a conductor if positive.

A bank of these placed in a circuit was known as a battery. This term was used from it's root meaning which is of course equally applicable to armory. Any collection of like things to deliver force.

Tesla describes in one of his papers the difference between the methods of construction. An end connected, interwound plate of the condensor, seperated by the insulating ,(or conducting, as with electrolytic condensors), set into a Faraday tube, is able to resonate at the specific frequency of the load. Modern elements do not allow this.

As to the oscillating DC. The energy delivered was both positive and negative of equal force. Only with this energy will it be possible to lock onto the wheel-work of nature.
9   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 05, 2011, 04:40:38 AM 
And, here we are. Arguing about the internet's description of condensors versus capacitors.

The original post was to ask what formed the B field within a wire? What substance within the wire becomes magnetised, for as we know, copper is non magnetic. I mentioned capacitors as another issue altogether.

Tell you what. Take some apart.

Get an old ignition coil condensor and cut open the casing. Then, do the same for a radio suppressing condensor on an alternator. Then, an electrolytic condensor, and, while you are at it, take apart a capacitor from a microwave oven, and an AC motor, and think about the description I gave earlier.

The evidence shows us the truth, no matter what the theory is.

Look into which speach Tesla gave where he describes the condensor's construction. This will tell you what I have learned. That there is a major difference. A fundamental one in fact, without which, you will never understand the purpose of asking "what is it that forms the B field in the first place"?

I have used referance pages before, to have them changed. So, it is better to simply do the research yourselves. The components are not that hard to find. Get a hack saw and start investigating.

That is what I did.

Look into old stuff. Go to junk yards and garage sales. Get something, anything old, and pull it apart to tease the truth from it, before the "recycling" movement swallows all the history, and all proof is gone.

Even better yet, make a condensor yourself and apply it to a circuit. The components are not hard to assemble. Remember, there are positive condensors, and negative condensors. There are also both, but that is a power source. We are interested in only catching and holding one side of the energisation.

No.

I am getting lost again.

Reply Quote Notify 

8   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 05, 2011, 06:07:48 AM 
No, I am asking what causes the B field to form, when the wire is energised by an electric field. Which specific component in the air or wire is aligned to form the magnetic flux? Why does this phenomena have reluctance,  reactance and capacitance? What FORMS it? For it to exhibit reluctance, it must be influenced by gravity, and therefore have mass. WHAT IS IT?

7   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 05, 2011, 10:19:22 AM 
The field surrounding an electrified form, which is magnetic in nature, and yes, swirling, is not what causes the field to form. The electric energy is the force creating it, yes. But what is it that the electric energy acts upon, to form the magnetic flux lines? Electrons? How can a thing act upon itself to form another energy signature? That would be like wind glowing. The electron is the charge carrier apparently, acting upon....what....to form the magnetic field which is in proportion to the amperage content.....meaning the two are linked, magnetism and amperage. .......Now, there is a big hint!!
6   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 05, 2011, 07:26:02 PM 
Quote from: poynt99 on July 05, 2011, 02:09:49 PMUnless you're going to bring the aether into the picture, the only "thing" pre-existing when you apply the electric field is the electric field. Therefore, the charge carrier acts in relation to or upon the applied electric field.

It seems there are some things that don't make sense here. No offence, but there are holes in your logic. How can the electric field be "pre-existing", before electric energy is applied? Are you saying a circuit is preenergised? Also, the charge carriers, which bring with them the energy to form the B field, act upon themselves?? This sounds a little preposterous I think.

If I drop a stone in a pond.....the ripples extend outward, yet the ripples are not the stone, nor does the stone bounce continually upon the water, causing standing waves to form of higher amplitude than the original wave from the first contact when the returning ripples from the edge of the pond meet and combine.

Also, if one looks at a magnet with a peice of magnetic viewing film, one will see a Bloch wall between the North and South pole, at the hemisphere, and another at the poles. THIS is the magnetic field. The iron filings show the flux path.....the energisation path, not the magnetic path, kind of like the pond again.....Floating leaves show us the top of the water, and whether it is still or moving, but not the depth of the waters.
solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 06, 2011, 06:31:47 AM 
Quote from: JouleSeeker on July 06, 2011, 02:37:13 AMRight -- as I noted, this could be "battery relaxation" (for example).

With regard to the ideal toroid experiment -- I wrote,
The question is, how is the change in magnetic field at the center of the loop SENSED by the loop, when the magnetic field outside the toroid itself is ZERO?    There is no magnetic field to affect the electrons in the wire, from the toroid, just an electric field.  And does this electric field propagate outward from the toroid at the speed of light?  I suppose so.

I'm hoping Frankly will consider the appearance of the electric field outside the toroid in the absence of a magnetic field outside the toroid, in his theoretical model.


Well, although I have not received any enlightenment from .99 regarding the questions I posed to HIS/HER statements, only the idea that I misunderstood HIS/HER statements somehow, (and if so, would like explanation please), I will answer this somewhat crossed message question.

Firstly, please be specific.....are we looking at a solenoid, or a torroid? Secondly, There is no Bloch wall formed on an electromagnet with present energisation, so a different set of phenomena are used to establish the rules of interaction than are used with magnets alone. Thirdly, with a torroid, or closed core transformer, as you rightly point out, all the magnetic energy for "induction" is within the core, therefore, how can this be "transferred" to the adjoining coil and provide useable energy via the collapsing or building magnetic lines of force.....and do it so well? The only answer is that the wire is being energised in some way that is not immediately apparent, and is occuring within the bounds of the primary coils' geometry, as it cannot be "sensed" untill the secondarie's winds are lower to the face of the torroid than the primary, so energy is lost. In the same manner, by placing wraps further out, there is loss. I wonder, has anyone used flat strap to wind a transformer? Probably not in nearly a hundred years. Interestingly, this is what was used for transformers with the AC electricity in it's early form...wire ribbon. Why? What did they know that seems to have been forgotten, or missed?

Previously I asked why amperage and magnetic strength of the B field were related. I wait for an answer.

As to "just conveying my thoughts" on what the form of the wheelwork of nature really is?? That thing that is the water in our pond? If I did that, what would you learn? No. How about you reflect on what I have said. The answer is there. Right before you. Only one person thus far has even attempted to think and imagine a solution, then, (hopefully) test that idea with apparatus. Oops, sorry. Did I just suggest that someone do science?

I wonder, did anyone measure the mass of the plates in the battery that is charging and measure the capacitance of the entire circuit and find the resonant frequency.....to see if there is a correlation with the running frequency?

What of these reported "sweet spots" with the present design?

Where are the joyous words extolling the solution has been found, for it is these that prove the thoughts. The basis of the harmonic scale of matter.

Have any mass measurements been done?

Why does the mass of the primary and secondary have to be so similar in transformers? What does "harmonic resonance" lock onto?

We hear the standing wave in our well tuned musical instruments all the time. Pianos are a prime example. Why is it that no-one has applied that thinking to energy amplification.

I recently learned that an "amplifier" in electrical engineering is not "amplifying" anything. To amplify means to increase in strength. So, the end result must be that energy is greater out than in via some sort of fulcrum or pulley. Like a gearbox, amplifying the mechanical energy to push the car faster with less engine speed. Utilising inertia to relieve torque. This was the reason for heavy flywheels in old engine designs. The storage of inertia so the energy from it could be amplified via pulleys and such.

However, nowadays it seems that to amplify a signal means to hold back on the original strength of the current, or working force, and control it. This means that the highest amplification of the signal possible is the same as having no amplifier present. The control of the signal DOWNWARDS in strength is referred to as amplification. It is this type of thinking that prevents discovery of the truth.

How, in what manner, can we amplify energy when we are not taught that energy spins and has inertia, just like a flywheel??

This motion is called reactance, reluctance and resistance and is the source of all of the original though forms and quaternion equations that once described, in perfect detail, the overall manner in which electricity operates based upon circles not lines.

How can vectors describe rotation of subatomic particles? It cannot. So, "science" invents quantum math to blur the edges of their straight lines, and gets further and further away from the truth.

Anyway, I am now ranting.

Back to the issue at hand.

What is affected by the energy from a source of electricity to form a magnetic field around the energised current carrying medium?

Ohh, and also, if you take out the core of a transformer and leave the coils adjacent, does it still work? Why? What must be done to prevent them interacting and transferring energy one to the other with the changing magnetic field?

This type of science is what must be done, all over again, to find the truth. I cannot just blurt it out, for I will not be believed. I tried that once before.

I have no credentials, only experimental experience. And, without the math skills to back me up, all I have is these words.

I can point the way, but you must walk.

I can show you pictures, and videos 'till the cows come home. These would only be the source of more conjecture.

I tried asking for expert assistance, none came. So, I now ask the questions of you that I asked myself, in order that you may also do the same thinking. This is what a teacher does, so the student may learn for themselves. Only in that manner will the result, once realised, be believed.

Do the investigations I suggested, think on the real reasons behind the simple processes, and the truth will be revealed.

Or, you can simply do nothing but continue along, blundering in the dark. Frankly, I don't give a damn
4   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: July 06, 2011, 07:27:58 PM 
Quote from: poynt99 on July 06, 2011, 03:35:18 PM@ frankly,

I have already provided the answer to the question regarding how current is induced in a loop of wire outside of either a solenoid or toroid. It's the electric field.

Now, regarding your initial question about what causes a magnetic B field:

The electron has charge. A spinning charged particle has a magnetic moment, i.e. it is a magnetic dipole. There are many free electrons in copper. When an electric field is applied to a copper wire, the magnetic moments of these free electrons become aligned such that a net magnetic moment (or field) is created which encircles the wire.

.99


Excellent, now we are getting somewhere.

So, could the amount of these dipoles in the wire, all lining up in one direction, have anything to do with the capacity of the wire? So, if long, or in a coil, deliver a pulse of energy to a load? In other words....is that what amperage is? The amount of dipoles aligned and then relaxing? Is that what the term reluctance equates to? The dipoles' relaxation speed?

SO.

Resistance then, must be related to the SIZE of the dipole. It's mass. So, aluminium, a lighter substance and yet, a metal and a conductor, conveys energy far easier for less space, the dipole's are smaller.

Cool. I hope you see the correlations here, because it is important to understand this simple stuff.

So, if the dipole, being aligned, and then allowed to relax, delivers that inertia to another component, called a load, or in the case of DC energy, has to be pulsed, (except with a resistance like light bulb, which is itself a resonating element), why does it have to stop spinning? Why not simply, instead of aligning the dipoles in the wire, and then allowing them to relax, set them spinning?

This, then, is also a changing magnetic field, so, delivers energy to the load just the same.

It is just that, one must use OSCILLATING DC energy to achieve this rotation of the dipoles.

If you investigate the actions of the elements in the present circuit, I think you will find, once the calculations are done, that the "sweet spots" described, are where the capacitance and inductance match harmonically, so, some extra rotation of the core's dipoles is occurring.

Also, the "feedback loop" is simply where this opposite polarity energy is coming from to achieve this.

Tesla was using OSCILLATING DC of HIGH FREQUENCY and HIGH POTENTIAL.


3   Solid States Devices / solid state devices / Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  on: Today at 04:30:59 AM 
Well, I am not sure what happened. I thought someone asked how energy could "come into" a circuit. In the describing of what "energy" is, I showed the thought process that led to (in a small way), understanding what forms energy, or amperage.

The amplification of this, is what I thought everyone was looking for. Small energy in, 10^13 times out, or something.

So, I spoke freely. To everyone here.

It seems I have either been ignored or shut out. No feedback, no thoughts, no expressions of consideration whatsoever in days....what gives, people??

All sorts of terse words for my continued musings, when I was trying to encourage discussion and thought among what I thought were like minded people, yet, after the point was made, nothing.....

The "wheelwork of nature" revealed in words, and not even a blip.....

Would a video be better?

Or, some drawings???

Would that help convey the thoughts?

Been there, done that. It doesn't make a difference.

If you look up "Watt meter design" you will find that modern science is already well educated in the inertia of eddy currents.

Place this mechanism, (which is supported by the background energy of the universe, just as the domains in a permanent magnet are), into a transformer core, and you have energy amplification. Simple really. But, has anyone realised this? Or are willing to discuss the implications? It would seem not.

Either I am being ignored, or everyone is feeling a little abashed that they have missed something so simple for so long.

Let me know which it is please, so I may move on.

I spend hours composing messages every time I try to get the message across. My time would be better spent enjoying my children, not ensuring their future. After all, why shift the status quo?

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11116.0

I think  I did it correctly. Sorry for the "Jacking". Seems my communication limitations have thwarted me again.

This is only the second time I have attempted to communicate in forums like this, and I don't understand much of the processes and social etiquette.

Hope to see some like minds join me.

Frankly.
Reply Quote Notify 

2   New theories about free energy systems / Тhe theory of energy streams / Eddy currents and their implications  on: Today at 10:04:57 AM 
A thought excercise, together with diagrams and experiments designed to unlock the mind.

Whats for yah ne're go bye yah
Thanks Grandma