Richard VIALLE's new theory about negative mass and overunity

[Khwartz]

Khwartz,  Thank you - that is very helpful.

You're welcome and nice if it could help you

   I'm glad pipe works well as I already have some 1/2" copper pipe.

Great!

I've also got a big coil of 3/4" copper pipe - probably 30 to 40 feet of it rolled into a flat pancake coil.

Lol, was it to produce hot solar water? could you upload a pic, looks I miss some reality on, to have a clear concept of...

That might make an interesting setup and I think I've got enough insulated wire to wrap it.

I think it is very good to follow one's intuition and "possible sign" of "The Divine Providence" (what ever meaning you may give to "Divine" )... but in its right time

But I'll probably stick to the more basic design for starters.

Hehe, think it could be a good idea so you could progress by little successes which will encourage you to continue and to overcome the little unsuccesses you could create in between then having enough certitude to take more risks with not yet tried at all solutions (not bolded for you, e2matrix, but for any other reader.)

Very Thanks for your interest in this replication and study,

B.R.
K.

[Khwartz]

Translation of results obtained with the Autogen as in:

http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/

   
Hall of Fame
• Hall of Fame
Ils l'ont fait ! résultats des COP>1
• They have done it! Results of the COP> 1
Maj le 20/12/2012
• Up-dated December 12, 2012

Date
Date
Pseudo
Nickname
* Puissance en entrée de l'autogénérateur (mW)
* Power at the input of the autogegerator (mW)
** Puissance en sortie de l'autogénérateur (mW)
** Power at the output of the autogegerator (mW)
=== COP (Rapport Pout/Pin)
===  COP (Ratio Pout/Pin)

12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 3700
** 6696
=== 1,81

21/12/2012
COLAS07
* 2150
** 4760
=== 2,21

26/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 1700
** 2610
=== 1,54

21/12/2012
COLAS07
* 1250
** 2100
=== 1,68

12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 256,73
** 619,67
=== 2,41

12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 251,86
** 554,63
=== 2,20

12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 252,76
** 482,23
=== 1,91

12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 250,3
** 427,64
=== 1,71

12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 231,2
** 265,21
=== 1,15

11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 77,76
** 182,25
=== 2,34

11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 87,20
** 173,01
=== 1,98

11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 75,90
** 162,56
=== 2,14

11/10/2012
MIZUNO57
* 82,13
** 126,15
=== 1,54

11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 51,79
** 112,50
=== 2,17

11/10/2012
MIZUNO57
* 81,80
** 104,17
=== 1,27

30/09/2012
PASCUSER
* 38,20
** 66,60
=== 1,74

17/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 4,66
** 56,20
=== 12,06

11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 7,99
** 39,35
=== 4,92

31/10/2012
MIZUNO57
* 27,75
** 31,39
=== 1,13

11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 4,64
** 22,09
=== 4,76

Résultats triés suivant la puissance en sortie mesurée.
•  Results sort out by measured output

Les puissances sont mesurées pour Pin, avec une résistance en entrée du bobinage ou un TOS-Mètre, pour Pout, avec une résistance de charge en sortie du Barreau, une ampoule ou au TOS-Mètre.
• The powers are measured for Pin, with a resistor at the input of the coil or a TOS-Meter [measures forward and backward power for high frequencies], for Pout, with a load resistor at the output of the Bar, a light bulb or a TOS-meter.

[Khwartz]

In this page of JLN's website:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep3.htm


the last graph at the end of the page is COP against the value of the resistance load.

You will see the right side since 1000 Ohms, negative; means that the autogen would feed back and no more consuming power as a balance between the energy received and the energy delivered, as at the output than at the "input".

Best Regards,
K.

[tim123]

Hi Verpies or Itsu,
  the gate-driver has arrived. It should be fun soldering it's tiny-little pins...

The guy in the vid Itsu linked made it look easy, but I think he's had practise...

I think that the example diagram top-right page 2 of the datasheet, (for non-inverting input) is probably the one I should use...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ucc27512.pdf

I could use some help in choosing a value for the resistor R3 please... I don't really understand what it's there for TBH...

Also, can you tell me what the function of the capacitor C2 is (between Vin and Gnd)? Also, how do I choose a value for it?

Apologies for my ignorance... I'm still very much a novice...

Regards, Tim

PS: While doing the washing-up, I decided that the cap is almost certainly just a smoothing cap... And the resistor is probably for limiting current... Hmmm.

[Khwartz]

Translation of the

2nd Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard

*** COPs (definitions of) ***

http://richard-vialle.info/

(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings applies to any writting by me on this website. )

-----

Q : Vous parlez souvent d'un COP, qu'est ce que c'est et que signifie-t-il ?
• You often speak about a COP, what it is and what does it mean?

R : Le COP est le coefficient de performance d'un système, c'est à dire sa capacité à fournir une certaine quantité de travail par rapport à l'énergie nécessaire à son fonctionnement. Pour un climatiseur par exemple, le COP sera le rapport entre l'énergie nécessaire à son fonctionnement et la quantité de chaleur qu'il peut restituer.
• The COP is the coefficient of performance of a system, that is its capacity to supply a certain amount of work regards to the energy necessary for its functioning. For an air conditioner for example, the COP will be the ratio between the energy necessary for its functioning and the quantity of heat which he can restore [while working as heat pump]. [This definition is quite good but not completely accurate. The ratio discribed previously is indeed the ENERGY CONVERSION EFFICIENCY of the system; as we haven't the Greek letter "eta", the standard symbol for, we will coine the acronym "ECE" here to shorten it. The exact definition of "COP" in our air conditioner and heat pump engineering offices - from which this concept and acronym come from -, is in fact the ratio of the USEFUL POWER under the PURCHASED POWER. Indeed, if the energy used to make the system functioning is free though the COP is infinite (solar panels,  wind turbines,  etc.); for COP, we essentially speak about "OPERATING COST". K.]


Le COP Global, qui prend en compte l'ensemble des énergies utilisées par le système, ne peut jamais être supérieur à 1, sauf anomalie des lois physique actuelle. Ainsi un climatiseur ne peut avoir un COP Global > 1 car il puise de l'énergie calorifique dans l'air environnant via une pompe à chaleur.
• The Global COP, which takes into account all the energies used by the system, can never be upper to 1, except current physical laws anomalies. So an air conditioner cannot have a Global COP > 1 because it draws some calorific energy from the air surrounding via a heat pump. [Here there is still the same and very often made confusion: what is named here "Global COP" is indeed THE "(GLOBAL) ENERGY CONVERSION EFFICIENCY". Nevertheless, if you change "Global COP" by "(global) energy conversion efficiency", the definition then becomes correct. K.


Les auto-générateurs Richard Vialle ont un COP > 1 (production de puissance supérieure à la puissance consommée) et un COP Global pour l'instant proche de 1 (sauf certains accidents ou nous dépassons largement de raison le COP  de 1, accidents que nous tentons de reproduire, comprendre et dompter).
• The Richard Vialle's Auto-generators have a COP > 1 (production of [useful] power superior to the [purchased] consummate power) and a Global COP [yes, "Global COP" here, but correctly defined and not as the author defined it] for the moment close to 1 (except certain incidents where we exceed widely out of reason the COP of 1, incidents which we try to reproduce, to understand and to bind).

[Note:
I know these concepts of "COP" and "ECE" are very confusing. There are often confused even by physicists! While not by trained in heating or air conditioning engineers who have coined these concept and acronym as already noticed before.

If the definition in the article before of "Global COP" was flawed by lack of differentiation (differentiation between "summation of all powers in input" versus "summation of all purchased powers in input") remains that here, and mostly in case of claimed overunity devices using EM energy in input and providing EM energy at the output too, "COP" and "ECE" tends to become the same while we get close to 1.0 and become the same when > 1.0! IF we refuse to see that ZEP energy IS an INPUT energy too.


Demonstration:


COP = Sigma Useful Powers / Sigma Purchased Powers

Sigma Purchased Powers = power coming from powers supplies of purchased energy (like batteries, grid)

When the power coming from power supplies of purchased tends to zero, COP tends to infinite.


ECE (flawed) = Sigma Useful Powers / Sigma all Input Powers (except ZPE input)

Sigma all Input Powers = power coming only from power supplies of purchased or not purchased energy, but "usual energie" so not ZPE input.

When the power coming from power supplies of purchased or not purchased energy, but "usual energie", tends to zero, (flawed) ECE tends to infinite too .


ECE (true) = Sigma Useful Powers / Sigma all Input Powers

Sigma all Input Powers = power coming from all power supplies of purchased or not purchased energy, including ALL "usual energies" (like Earth magnetic field) AND ZPE input.


When the power coming from purchased energies tends to zero, true ECE tends to 1.0.


So COP and ECE are fundamentally two different concepts and it is necessary that we state if we talk about a UNCOMPLETED energetic conversion efficiency or A TRUE COMPLETE one.


In the case of the Autogenerator, the confusion becomes even worse cause there are 2 levels of "COP" (and so 2 levels of "ECE" too).

The first level is the ratio of the useful power delivered by the "bar" (the two extremities of the core of the Autogenerator), to the power consumed by the coil and drawn from most often an amplifier. It's the COP-bar (or "COP S" if you want, "S" for "specific").


The second level is the ratio of the useful power delivered by the "bar" (and sometimes by the coil itself while producing "negative power" back towards the power supply), under the power consumed by the whole system and drawn from the power supply. It's the COP of the Autogen"; which is the true "Global COP".


So when in the previous article it is talked about "COP" it was indeed the "COP S" but when about "Global COP" in his definition it was indeed by error a "global energetic conversion effeciency", while we do need a "Global COP" but correctly defined. (My apologies if the attempt of explanation of the differences between these concepts is not yet so clear, I will try to improve it later if needed, regards to your possible questions.).]

-------

Hoping this could help,
Best regards,
K.