Welcome to Understanding Overunity!!!!!

[MileHigh]

Hey Wattsup:

You certainly have an interesting theory and good luck running with it.  You know how hard-core intellectual mathematicians spend months and months developing theories and mathematical proofs to solve all sorts of theoretical mathematical problems.  It's a big deal.

I am too tired to comment on your posting but I will later.

But just for fun here are two classic circuitry examples for you to ponder with respect to your model and how it fits in.

You have two ideal inductors of equal value.  Imagine one has one ampere of DC current circulating through it, and we put a ground reference on the left terminal of this coil.  Call it "coil1."  So the coil is in a closed loop with one amp of current flowing through it.  Initially the second coil is simply disconnected.  Then imagine then we add the second coil in series with the first coil, we "switch it in" to the single ideal coil circuit instantly.  So we have this:  Ground - coil1 - coil2 - back to ground.  Also, there is no magnetic coupling at all between the two coils.  In the real world on the bench you put the two coils at right angles to each other to have near-zero coupling.  Before and after the spike the voltage at the junction point is zero volts.

What happens at the the moment the "switch in" happens?  The answer is that the current instantly drops to 0.7071 amp (for ideal coils).  And the potential measured at the connection point between the two coils goes infinitely high for an infinitely short amount of time.

With non-ideal coils in a real-world circuit on the bench, the current will also nearly instantly drop to perhaps a little bit less than 0.7071 amp.  At the connection point between the two coils, the voltage will shoot up in a spike to hundreds or perhaps even thousands of volts.  The pulse width will be very narrow, and the higher the voltage spike, the narrower the pulse will be.

Anyway, that might be interesting for you to contemplate with respect to your theoretical model!

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Wattsup:

Not homogeneous in the first instance before the wire becomes completely hot. I am not looking for the hot part but the build up before the hot part. If electricity is moving from a to b at XX speed, so fast, then I should not have seen any build up because of the speed and just seen a blackening going from left to right, not a blackening as we see from both ends towards the center. If action is reaction then the wire is telling us exactly what is going on.

Each end of the wire is attached to a large mass of metal acting as a heat sink.  So the heat being produced in the ends of the wire is flowing into the set of heatsinks.  That explains the blackening from both ends towards the center.  The center of the wire is farthest away from the heatsinks so it gets hotter.  So the wire itself is dissipating even heat all along the wire.

the simple wire being a coil is going to do the same thing the simple wire does and that is with battery DC, it will advance from both polarities into the center of the coil (blotch). The blotch itself is the result of two advancing polarities canceling themselves.

This is probably a whole other discussion.  There is no Bloch wall in an air coil or solid-filled coil or a bar magnet.  I don't know if your model expects this but if it does then you have a problem if you accept what I am saying.  This one is a quite popular misconception.

We have a defintiion for them but both these definitions are so counter intuitive that they may as well be a totally foreign concept because most guys just cannot wrap their heads around it in a pragmatic way.

That's where the mechanical analogies can come into play to help visualize and understand but unfortunately you don't seem to want to go there.  It's all quite clear to me.

I do not see a coil behaving like a flywheel because the coil is just a wire and if the wire cannot act like a flywheel why should the coil?

It's the empty space within and around the coil that is like an invisible flywheel.  They behave identically to each other if you take an appropriate frame of reference for each case.

Wire heats up - spin creates friction,
Coil losses - spin engenders slippage.

I am surprised that you say this.  When you say "coil losses" don't you mean the resistive losses in the coil?  That would be the same as the wire heating up, no?

Some will ask, if electricity is SC, how can you explain the diode.

It's holes and electrons being pushed around by the electric field on the dance floor.  If the electric field goes one way, the holes and electrons are like wall flowers on opposite sides of room.  If the electric field goes the other way, then the electrons and the holes race towards each other and annihilate each other at the center of the dance floor like some sort of insane mosh pit.

Wow, sounds like the crazy ranting of a madman, but then why does it all fit into what we see.

I love "B" and "D" schlocky sci-fi and exploitation movies from the 50s and 60s.  Check out the Internet Movie Database Bottom 100.

When DC was the ruling force, it must have been very troublesome for Tesla to introduce the idea of AC as a better method of mass electricity generation.

Edison pushed for his crappy DC because he wanted to make money off of it.  I seem to recall that he also didn't even understand AC.  Thinner wires are cheaper wires and AC won.

Good luck with the model and the intellectual journey.  You know what Bette Davis said.

MileHigh

[wattsup]

@MH

Thanks again for your comments. I will be talking about series coils soon enough but we are not there yet. I am afraid I have not been a good host these days because of work and family overload.

Please understand that what I am trying to do is like putting an image covered with many blank cards on the table and taking out one card at a time to show more of the image. It is hard to get the complete picture at this stage. Once I get through the other effects, it should start making sense to many.

I am not asking you to espouse anything here but your sounding board is fantastic. I know it is intellectually hard to take grasp of and for you to post but you are not obliged. It is very challenging for me as well and very energy consuming because I usually reread my posts a good 10 times. I can take this along slowly as she goes and whenever you feel like it, please let's talk more. I will not always reply to your comments to not break the flow but your interjections are very welcome at all times.

@all

I am looking at this in the sense that I am looking for over unity. The Standard EE Model (or SEEM for short) has no room for OU at this time. Not even on the top dusty shelf of the EE archives. So what I am looking for is why and where in the SEEM should there be a place for OU. To do that, you need to turn over every leaf, every shred and ask yourself why is it like that. While you do that, you will start to develop a critical thinking mode to correlate out of the box ideas. It is only out of the box that we will find OU.

How many centuries had man thought the world was flat. We still survived, we still advanced and when it was found to be round, we just kept on advancing from there (maybe not always in a good way). So how long will we be in the SEEM, it's up to us and the questions we ask and the logic we employ, but one day it will happen.

The one wire on a battery, as stupid as it sounds, is how DC works. DC is not AC. DC works on both sides of the coil. You can short a wire 1000 times and it will tell you the same story each time. So we make coils and pulse them on one side. We measure the voltage and see scope waveforms all based on differential potential. But looking at coils as differential potential will not lead to OU because it keeps you stuck in the SEEM. But what other tools do we have to see what is going on in our coils. We have our brains and our perspective that already plays for 50% of the SEEM because even if you work by that model you still have to use your own imagination as to what is going on in your coils.

All I am showing is that there is a perfectly feasible other method that holds the sames values on our instruments but expands your choices of experimentation. If you never realize or consider that maybe ether enters the coil to produce the magnetic field and not the other way around, then  how will you think of making OU devices with more secondary. There are no accidents in nature. Everything has a reason and ether needs a good reason to pile onto your secondaries. So how do you call ether in and how can you trick it to think there is more happening.

If the Ether Pile On Model (or EPOM for short) that I am trying to develop has any truth to it, it will apply to all energy sources including our sun. Imagine all the energy interactions in our sun are so intense and complex that the EPOM delimits a solar system. All that ether is already precondensed for us because of our sun. So imagine your coil is a fledgling sun, a seed for a star, a caller of ether that you use as bait to trap in more ether then you need. So you devise your baits and devise your nets to catch the ether feed in so many other ways.

Parallel and series, end tap or center tap, single set or multiple set, all devises fall into these categories. With the EPOM, ether will follow all of them as we are doing now but not all will produce OU as we are realizing. Right now we are in the primary/secondary type. If the DC model of + and - forward is correct, you will never get OU with only a primary and a secondary any more then the sun could work with two beats. That is where the SEEM stops and EPOM should start. We have to start expanding our coils in multiple primaries to confuse the heck out of the ether so it piles on more to the extreme. There is no other way. You can pulse the frequencies all you want, if you use a peanut, you will be left with the shell.

Coil winding example - mutli primary toroid.

Let's go to the extreme. Take a toroid core and calculate the wire diameter required to make 360 turns to complete a one layer wind over the entire core. Now wind the primaries in 3 to 4 turns each so you get 80 to 120 primaries all in parallel. Or take the same toroid and wire diameter but wind 360 primaries of 4 turns wound in pancake mode (very difficult to do - I have never seen this done). Now that is out of the box for a primary. Now wind your secondary any way you want to output for more volts or for more amps or a mix of both. Now imagine those primaries being in parallel will be able to handle much more energy growth then if you only used one 10 turn primary that will never be able to increase as the output refeeds the source. The primary is the most important coil because it has to start the process and be strong enough to grow with the processing. The 360 turns is just an example to explain the notion of multiple primaries.  If the flux in the toroid has a turning effect, then the primary all around the core will ensure this to be constant throughout the core. Maybe the ether will see this event as a potential runaway energy anomaly and decide to pile on a larger field presence. This is how to play with ether. It's like going fishing. Find the right spot and use the right bait and the fish will go crazy. Well, not always with Walleye. hehehe

The secondary could be five mag wires wound 360 degrees around the core as one or more layers and paralleled to increase the amperage output. You can put the primary and the core inside a plastic donut shape and wind the secondary on the donut so it is not skin close to the primary layer. This will give some space for the flyback field release.

There is so much more I have to say so you can understand how to drive such a coiling technique and what I mean by flyback field release.

Put it this way. If the EPOM is valid and the field comes from outside the coil, then on pulse off the field is released and will never collapse back into the coil. First of all, can anyone explain what the SEEM is for field collapse. The field that is on the outside of the coil, re-enters the coil when the pulse is off. So what is the step by step mechanism for the field to do that. I have never heard of a more wishful theory then that but this is what the SEEM purports to happen and we hear guys saying this everyday. The field just zaps back into the coil and creates this huge voltage jump. Wow, talk about a well trained field. No way man. That is not possible because for the field to do that, for the field to fall inwards like that, you would require a black hole that sucks in everything around it.

It would be like saying when you exhale cigarette smoke, as soon as you stop exhaling the smoke re-enters your mouth. If this was true then one cigarette should last a lifetime.

Next post will be on biased and non-biased pulsing that will explain the field collapse misnomer and how re-biased spin conveyance may be the reason we have flyback or as some wrongly call the supposed "field collapse" as being BEMF.

wattsup

[MileHigh]

Wattsup:

First of all, can anyone explain what the SEEM is for field collapse. The field that is on the outside of the coil, re-enters the coil when the pulse is off. So what is the step by step mechanism for the field to do that.

I'll just give you the mundane explanation.

The field is not on the "outside" of the coil.  It's both inside and outside the coil like the familiar bar magnet field pattern.  The field does not "re-enter" the coil when the field collapses.  The field will diminish and decrease in strength as the field collapses.

So on the most basic level if you had magic glasses that allowed you to see the field, as it collapsed it would look something like a glow that decreases in brightness until it eventually disappears.  The glow is brightest inside the coil.

If a coil is a closed circuit the field sustains itself and does not go away.  If you insert a resistance into the loop of the coil then the field will start to collapse.  The larger the value of the resistance, the faster the  field collapses.

When you observe the spike of voltage, it's a secondary effect that is driven by the primary effect of the collapsing field and equivalent decreasing current flow.

And the root diving mechanism behind all of this is to never forget that the coil and it's associated magnetic field/current flow is an energy storage mechanism that takes work/energy to "fire up" and will then release that work/energy in a "burn" if there is a load.

MileHigh

[mondrasek]

The field is not on the "outside" of the coil.  It's both inside and outside the coil like the familiar bar magnet field pattern.  The field does not "re-enter" the coil when the field collapses.  The field will diminish and decrease in strength as the field collapses.

So on the most basic level if you had magic glasses that allowed you to see the field, as it collapsed it would look something like a glow that decreases in brightness until it eventually disappears.  The glow is brightest inside the coil.

MH, don't we need to consider the collapsing field as "moving" back to the coil?  It has to move to satisfy the fact that it will generate a current in a secondary stationary "pickup" coil.  Ultimately it collapses down to nothing and so does not still exist within the coil.  But are not magnetic field lines moving to and from the surface of the conductor when the coil energizes and de-energizes?

M.