Welcome to Understanding Overunity!!!!!

[Dave45]

Magnetic grid
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/9656-electric-field-magnet-43.html#post223133

[wattsup]

@ismael_34

Thank you very much for your post. I have prepared a post for @MH and @others so I will post it and then you may see some answers in there that Tesla maybe did not consider at the time. I have a lot to say bout DC and AC but starting with a battery and short circuit was the best place to start and your post is just right on the subject. Thanks again.

@MH and @all

Thanks again for your comments. As I said before, it is like gold bars being pulled from the EE perspective shelf, but we have to assume that not all gold is 99% pure and therefore we have to question everything. There is a sort of categorical assumption wanting to say "That's just the way it is - accept it and move on".

I did not really want to delve that much on @TK's HV wire burst because I have no way right now to video the same event in high speed, thus I have no way to confirm the actual effect. I will get around to that eventually. I have to see it happen.

What I would prefer is to concentrate on my last post and images of the 14 awg wire. As I have shown, the energy dispersion on the wire is not homogenous as one would expect if electricity was traveling in one direction as we have seen so many times in animations. This basic notion does not make any sense at all if you compare this to anything else we know about electricity and magnetism.

Look here at this video explaining the present EE standard of "current flow".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Oul4S2wfCk

What I am trying to do is go beyond this and ask some pointed questions and try to find somewhere where the standard EE is proven to a level that is irrefutable. So far I have not found anything. All I see is the standard "accept this as we tell you and don't ask questions". Seems like another form of religion where we are asked to believe in something that is unseen, unheard, unobservable but regardless of the great lack of evidence, you must believe this is how it works when you see it on the scope or through your volt meter.

So maybe we all need to tip our perspective a little to the middle of the road here and play the midway advocates. I know it is not easy but just consider that all those that came before us were not Gods. They were all people that had the same limitations as you and I and they all tried to make heads or tales of the EE phenomena in a way that they could wrap their brains around and produce a working society. EE works, regardless of how it is really working, it works, so I think this is the main hold back to advancing or if that is not the right word, going deeper into the actual function of electricity.

Example: Consider with an open mind that the magnetic field (MF) present around an energized coil is produced in one of two ways.

1) The MF is produced by the coils ability to expel internal magnetic flux.

Or...

2) The MF is produced by the coils ability to attract and concentrate exterior magnetic flux.

So..... the MF can come from inside the coil going outwards or from outside the coil going inwards.

Now you can go through all the known EE standards and in all cases, both of these possible MF reasons will always be valid. But EE only considers the first when curiously the second one will explain much more of the EE phenomena if you are looking to work in OU.

Put it this way, right now there is no generalized OU device in the world. One day there will be. On that day and thereafter, a new EE phenomena called OU will be introduced to the the EE standard and EE guys will have to wrap their heads around it or become EE dinosaurs or Level 1 functionals. But the guys doing OU research right now need to wrap their heads around it before it is realized. That's what researchers do. So to be totally honest with the eventual OU phenomena, guys needs to think in what I would call "Bimodal EE (or BEE for short)". If you are a standard die-hard EEer, there is no point working in OU. Why would you? It's impossible, or is it? That is the question. hehehe

Question: #1

You have a toroidal core. You wrap two primaries of 180 degrees on the coil. Then you wrap two secondaries, one over each primary. So you pulse the primary. Why is it that the outer wrapped secondary,

- that is layered  further from the core then the primary, and,
- that has an energized primary between the secondary and the core, and,
- in which the primary is actually working like a quasi cloaking device between the secondary and the core,

... can this secondary coil still output impressed power. Where did that power come from?

Did it come from the primary expelling a field into the core that then goes back outwards through the primary to transfer to the secondary plus the fact that the primary will also expel directly into the secondary, or, is it because the primary is energized over the core making the primary seem to have more energized mass drawing in more ether towards the primary and core to produce a MF that transfers onto the secondary that is conveniently wrapped on the outside, so first in line to the impress. Both effects 1 and 2 would be valid in the way we see coil exchange occur.

So again here the flux origin can come from choice 1 or 2. So why are we all dumbed down on one possibility when there really exists two? Both just as plausible and both can comply with already achieved EE standards. Who knows, there could even be a third or fourth possibility.

Think of any effect you have done and both 1 or 2 is plausible. Sometimes the theory finds only one possibility as a source, but sometimes the theory will find two. If our present EE is based on the first theory and it has gotten us this far, then maybe the second will get us even further.

I am not talking about changing EE standards for students looking to work in electronics to design the next iPod. I am talking about expanding the EE standards for OUers only. They are the ones who will push to the next level. The rest of the world does not have to bother with BEE and can continue to live and work in the uni-directional safe zone. BEE will give guys more perspectives and tools to push their experiments more out of the box.

I am not even asking you yourself to espouse the BEE method or call it what you want. Some will call it Bull I know, but that's OK too. If the bull comes from a smart reflection, great. If it comes from malice, not great, but that's the way forums go. Anyways, I am just calling it BEE to give it some form.

Consider that most present technology is, to a good extent, doomed by its past. We say we walk on the shoulders of great men but we also run with their mistakes and oversights and darn trickery. They were not perfect then and we are not perfect today.

When the first coil was energized and the compass needle moved, someone first decided that the effect was caused by a field expelled by the coil. On that same day, if that same person said instead that the energized coil attracts or causes an over concentration of Ambient Ether Field (AEF), we would all have thought today that the coils field comes from outside the coil going inwards.

Before a coil is energized it is like a rock, or a piece of metal or anything else matter can make. Once it is energized it comes alive and this attracts the ether around it to compress more on the source of this energization. Do you realize how this impacts coil winding strategies. hehehe

But there is so much more. We are not only fighting to work against our own ignorance but we must realize we are also have to fight against a new world order that will keep us ignorant at all cost.

Thinking of the post made by @ismael_34, Tesla had a damn hard time trying to figure out why he was getting spiked even when the short was inside a Faraday cage. How is it possible? So what if the spike comes from outside the cage going towards the shorting impact and passes through everything in line of sight including anyone standing remotely near the impact source. Tesla was so adamant that the spikes came from the source and this was his only consideration while ether was trying to tell him "hey man, look behind you".

Question: You have the power of the gods in your hand. You are out in space where there is no star to be seen. With the flick of your finger (or the twitch of your nose) you create a gigantic star from nothing then into existence. Enumerate all the forces this will create and effects it will have in the stars vicinity. Can these forces correlate with Tesla creating a sudden gigantic spark. Can a spark be considered a fledgling star? Can an energized coil be considered a fledgling spark. So can an energized coil be considered the first step towards becoming a star attracting to it so much ether energy. Throughout most all of the universe we have ether just waiting to pounce on any sign of life. We have ether in us. We are all only 2% away from being ether. We are alive. We take totally inanimate objects and energize them and we change that ether neglecting object into an ether attracting powerhouse. One little coil was always off and as soon as it is on, it receives ethers undivided attention.

I saw this the other day and realized a connection. Consider it is winter and a frozen icicle that is stuck to your car. You are driving around and the icicle will not fall or melt or weaken. The damn thing is stubbornly holding on to that fender and away you go. I realized that the faster the car goes, the colder the icicle gets and the harder it holds in place. I saw this on so many cars while driving to work and was just amazed that the winter cold was always surrounding the icicle and giving it strength to withstand its perilous travels. I was even rooting for them. We are the icicle and our cold is ether.

I'll stop here or this post can go with 200 more lines easy.

More to come.

wattsup

[Gwandau]

Excellent post, wattsup.

Your point of view is exactly what is needed to ascend to a higher level of understanding, and this "outside the box" project of yours is truly inspiring.

Mankind quite naturally tend to base the initial interpretation of any observed phenomenon by relating it to our "database" of common sensory input, but the appearance of anything observed is bound to change with perspective. So what seems like solid facts on one level naturally will appear as incorrect information seen from a wider perspective. And the beauty of it all is that there is no final truth, there is no end to understanding in an infinite universe.

If our present EE is based on the first theory and it has gotten us this far, then maybe the second will get us even further.

This is what it is all about.

Gwandau

[MileHigh]

Wattsup:

What I would prefer is to concentrate on my last post and images of the 14 awg wire. As I have shown, the energy dispersion on the wire is not homogenous as one would expect if electricity was traveling in one direction as we have seen so many times in animations. This basic notion does not make any sense at all if you compare this to anything else we know about electricity and magnetism.

Not sure why you would say that the energy dispersion in the wire is not homogenous.

With respect to your comments about coils and magnetic fields, it all stems from what a magnetic field looks like around a wire with DC current going though it.  A coil is just an extension of that concept.  The simplest inductor is just a small piece of straight wire.

In engineering, you can often work with slight abstractions.  Yes a coil can produce a magnetic field or react to an external magnetic field.  But for energy accounting purposes, we realized that all you need to know is the inductance value and the current flow through an inductor to work with it and use it.  Just like people never talk about the electric field associated with a capacitor and the collapse of the electric field as the capacitor discharges.

Then you factor in the fact that we discovered that in Nature energy and power are always associated with the product of two variables.  So we have two electrical variables, and two variables for various physical systems, and so on.  So it turns out that Nature is acting the same way energy-wise for different "energy systems."  They are so similar that it's uncanny.  We figure the same thing is the reality throughout the Universe.

So with this perspective, one of the points of view might be to look at how these two variables interact and try to see if there might be any remarkable differences with other energy systems and without wanting to split quantum hairs, they are not different.

And perhaps to distill this down and crystalise it down to a simple example, the coil behaving just like a flywheel.  So you can imagine a flywheel spinning up and spinning down, no magic there.  You can see and feel it and there is no surprise in how it behaves.

Now, here is a simple test to see if you can visualize this:  Thing of the main coil in a Bedini motor (not the pick-up coil).  How do you visualize a flywheel acting like the coil in a Bedini motor acts?

Again, as a reminder, we are concerned with power and energy, and we are not concerned at all about the magnetic field.  Instead of worrying about the magnetic field, we use the measure of current flow instead because that's tangible and we can measure it and the current flow and the magnetic are inextricably linked to each other and are essentially the same thing.

So can anybody answer the question?  It's important to stress this is not some stupid pop quiz.  If you are interested in electronic circuits and energy then you should be able to visualize this.  And if you can indeed visualize this then it may help demystify this notion that coils are "aether antennas" or however you want to term it.

Finally, nobody is suggesting that you don't take your intellectual journey as per the theme of this thread.  But you will be that much wiser if you can look at a Bedini motor and visualize what Nature is doing on an electrical level.

MileHigh

[wattsup]

@MH

Thanks for your comments. Let me answer them in your post in bold.

Wattsup:

Not sure why you would say that the energy dispersion in the wire is not homogenous.

You are right, I did not put more precision because of post lengths. 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.

With respect to your comments about coils and magnetic fields, it all stems from what a magnetic field looks like around a wire with DC current going though it.  A coil is just an extension of that concept.  The simplest inductor is just a small piece of straight wire.

In engineering, you can often work with slight abstractions.  Yes a coil can produce a magnetic field or react to an external magnetic field.  But for energy accounting purposes, we realized that all you need to know is the inductance value and the current flow through an inductor to work with it and use it.  Just like people never talk about the electric field associated with a capacitor and the collapse of the electric field as the capacitor discharges.

I know all about that, but 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. For pulsing, this provides so many new ways of thinking about coils. It is not merely positive to negative or negative to positive but negative and positive to blotch. Once this perspective becomes more known and experiments are designed in that line of thinking, maybe we can win against what I have already called "Half Coil Syndrome". The syndrome is because of the perspective because if you realize this perspective, you will start working out coiling to counter it. This is good for OUers.  .

Then you factor in the fact that we discovered that in Nature energy and power are always associated with the product of two variables.  So we have two electrical variables, and two variables for various physical systems, and so on.  So it turns out that Nature is acting the same way energy-wise for different "energy systems."  They are so similar that it's uncanny.  We figure the same thing is the reality throughout the Universe.

So with this perspective, one of the points of view might be to look at how these two variables interact and try to see if there might be any remarkable differences with other energy systems and without wanting to split quantum hairs, they are not different.

And perhaps to distill this down and crystalise it down to a simple example, the coil behaving just like a flywheel.  So you can imagine a flywheel spinning up and spinning down, no magic there.  You can see and feel it and there is no surprise in how it behaves.

The only reason we see the product of two variables is that we use volt meters that can only see the potential difference between any two points. This gives us absolutely no way of knowing what is really going on inside our systems in a visual or intuitive sense. We spend our days talking about voltage and current. It feels like we are doctors of the King working in the dark ages. We check what the king eats and what the king expels to consider his current state of health. But be have no idea whatsoever what is really going on inside the Kings' body. Volts and amps. 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. What I would like to do in these threads in give some bulk to these notions, give them some character. You know when something is wrong and you cannot put your finger on the cause of so many problems and then, one day the linking solution dawns on you and you start to see everything just falls into place. This is where I am at right now and I will try to explain these slowly so each aspect can take its rightful place in a fully conceptualized working of electricity. 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?

The way I see electricity in a wire is so different to present day accepted concepts because I need to see it in my minds eye interacting in the wire or coil and present day concepts just create so much cloudiness that guys just try to accept things as they are purported.

The way I see electricity in a wire is simple and has to do with each and every atom inside the copper mass making up this linear copper or other conductive ridden object. So I will say some here as a preamble because this concept needs to be so well described that I am not really ready to explain it in a totally dumbed down manner.

To just get some idea, consider that the copper atom is a magnet so your wire is chock full of tiny magnets. Now think of each magnet (atom) as being suspended in a gyroscopic mechanism that is comprised of their outer shell electrons which hold each atom in a three dimensional physical space between all other atoms that are dong the same.

So let's just say you had five magnets and for our sake here, each magnet is placed in a gyroscopic mechanism and all five are tightly held together so each magnet can move in any degree or angle. When the magnets are at rest they are all aligned to the Earth field. But now I approach one of the end magnets with a much larger magnet in my hand and as this larger magnet comes near the 1st magnet, the 1st magnet starts to turn towards my hand held magnet and this makes the 2nd, 3rd 4th and 5th magnets turn as well. It is as if once the first magnet turns, the others follow right away in kind. Now when I change the hand held magnet to point with the other polarity the 5 magnets turn in the opposite way in succession. By changing the hand held magnets pointing polarity the 5 magnets are reacting in kind and when it is done in the right cadence, the 5 magnets start turning and turning. Now think that I have a second held held magnet in my other hand that I approach to the 5th magnet side. So I turn the 1st magnet side CW and the 5th magnet side CCW. Now the 1st and 2nd magnets are turning CW and the 4th and 5th magnets are turning CCW and the 3rd magnet located in the center is not turning at all. In a nutshell, for me, this is what is happening inside our wires and coils.

The hand held magnets are our power sources and these power sources just make our wire atoms turn and turn by what I simply call  "Spin Conveyance" (SC). If you Google "spin convenyance", you fill not find much so this confirms to me that this is new enough.

By this visualization, voltage is simply the speed of spin and amperage is the number of atoms that are actually spinning in the conveyance. This simply means that if you have a thick wire and you apply a thin wire to it as a power source, only the diameter of the thin wire will be spinning in the thick wire since the thin wire regulates the maximum amperage available to the thick wire, and the voltage of the thin source wire will regulate the speed of spin of the copper atoms. When I look at electricity in this manner, ever effect in OU or standard EE all starts making so much sense.

Voltage = Speed of SC,
Amperage = Percentage of conductive mass in conveyance.

This explains much more directly why.....

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

Everything we deal with regarding the generation of electricity involves spin. We take an inner rotor magnet and an outer stator coil. The magnet turns and turns and turns. At each turn of the rotor, the atoms inside the stator spin to agree with the changing rotor polarities. The speed of spin (voltage) and the strength (amperage) of spin are available at the ends of each stator coil as a power source or atomic spin source. When we connect a coil to that power source now the atoms in the coil are spinning as well. If we put a light bulb on the power source, both leads are spinning one CW and the other CCW and the filament in the center receives both spin directions and creates friction and light.

All we are doing is transferring atomic spin momentum via SC and all our effects can be explained by this one simple attribute of electricity.

Some will ask, if electricity is SC, how can you explain the diode. Well the diode no longer becomes our favorite analog as a check-valve. It changes to become a one way ratchet. Since the one way ratchet can only turn in one direction, this creates the illusion of being like a check valve that perpetuates the illusion of electricity as having a single directionality. Several times in past posts I have eluded to why we only have positive diodes when electricity should also be controlled with negative diodes since if you can make a one way ratchet turning CW, you can also make one that will turn CCW.

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

Now, here is a simple test to see if you can visualize this:  Thing of the main coil in a Bedini motor (not the pick-up coil).  How do you visualize a flywheel acting like the coil in a Bedini motor acts?

Again, as a reminder, we are concerned with power and energy, and we are not concerned at all about the magnetic field.  Instead of worrying about the magnetic field, we use the measure of current flow instead because that's tangible and we can measure it and the current flow and the magnetic are inextricably linked to each other and are essentially the same thing.

So can anybody answer the question?  It's important to stress this is not some stupid pop quiz.  If you are interested in electronic circuits and energy then you should be able to visualize this.  And if you can indeed visualize this then it may help demystify this notion that coils are "aether antennas" or however you want to term it.

At this stage of the thread I do not think it is time to actually look at a given device. There are so many more effects to understand in a stand alone way before we can start looking at a complete system. I don't think Bedini knows enough about electricity himself to teach us how to get to the next level. I myself may be wrong in the above but I am exercising the level of out-of-the box thinking always being concerned with the theory being correlative to the observations we already see in our effects. Bedini will not teach us this, It will only confuse the issues I am trying to discuss here as I am trying to offer not "The Way" but a practical way of thinking out of the box. Bedini will only offer you a way to get to his level of present day checkmate and that is not where I want to go with this.

Finally, nobody is suggesting that you don't take your intellectual journey as per the theme of this thread.  But you will be that much wiser if you can look at a Bedini motor and visualize what Nature is doing on an electrical level.

Phew, I am glad to read your last sentence as this is not easy for me to open up. I am not saying I am 100% right or wrong. Guys in the future will know more about this then I ever will but I only want here to be able to at least point to a different horizon and walk towards that hilltop. These new ideas will maybe help get across what Tesla may not have been able to get across at his time. 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. Since DC and AC, we have nothing. I am sure Tesla was never 100% satisifed with AC and that is why his later works involved so many other disciplines as being his untendered way of looking for something more intuitive. 

MileHigh
/quote]

More to come.

wattsup