Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

[phoneboy]

The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant.  He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back.  Just an idea.

[bajac]

The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant.  He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back.  Just an idea.

I am not sure I understand how your setup works. Do you have a sketch showing the expected magnetic flux lines between the inducing and induced coils?

What I was trying to say is that if you use a single magnet or two magnets with the same magnetic poles, you will get a much weaker magnetic field for the same gap than when using a magnetic field between two opposite magnetic poles. When you have an air gap in between two opposite magnetic poles, more magnetic flux lines cross the gap to merge and form continuous loops around the two opposite magnets. That is the intended message of "do not kill the dipole." Did I explain it in a clear manner?

[phoneboy]

@BAJAC, I believe I get what your saying.  I had a minute so I whipped up another drawing with single loops no cores and vectors.  The red and blue coils are the inducers and the green is the induced.  I hope this helps a bit, again just an idea.

[bajac]

Thanks Phoneboy. I hope to see your device built, soon.

I am very puzzled with the fact that the genius of the 19th century did not seem to associate the small armature reaction of the generators with the efficiency. How come something that obvious has been overlooked for so long? Ferranti, Mordey, Thompson, and Tesla new about the small armature reaction of the iron-less coil armatures but to my knowledge they did not relate it to the efficiency of the rotating generators. Everything points out that the only person who did relate it the small armature reaction with the efficiency of the alternators was Clemente Figuera.

I mean, if the input power is the torque times the RPM, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to know that a small armature reaction should have made an alternator more efficient. It can be concluded that conspiracy and suppression are not the only causes for not having over unity generators, today. The brilliant minds of the past and present times might have played a larger role.

[bajac]

The other question you may have is, why did not Mr. Figuera explicitly mentioned the principle of operation of his device? Did he know about the principle at all?

My best guess is yes! Mr. Figuera knew about the principle of operation but it was against his economic interest to mention it in his patents. The reason is simple, if Figuera had mentioned the principle of operation of his device, the competitors would have just used the devices built by Ferranti, Siemens, and Mordey. The latter devices were more practical to build and did not have to pay royalties. In that case, it was more likely that Figuera would have not received the payment from the Union of Banks. In addition, Figuera might have encountered problems for getting the patent awarded based on the existing arts.