Free Solid State/mechanical energy

[barbosi]

OK,
Before I get shut, I have to warn you, I don't really think Erfinder is a MIB. You guys lets go for a little humor once in a while, shall we? Humor is something you cannot find in sitcoms, so stop watching them. Those are designed to brainwash.

If you weren't to angry you could read at the end of my *outrageous* post:

I hope you got my message: turn every rock, even you think you know the truth.

which I still believe in.
As Erfinder said, study and also ask smart questions to get smart answers.

All the best to everyone.

[Trump]

barbosi

     Have a good night, hope tomorrow will bring a better day. Some humor is ok, it will kind of get your mind working a little. I wish there was a way to have all of us on the same page so we could all understand this patent and then go on to the next one.



Night All     






Trump

[Charlie_V]

barbosi,
These are great questions!  This keeps me thinking.  I've got some questions of my own, and I have some ideas to the solutions but I suppose time will answer them.

A: You measure the inductance of the secondary coils (or calculate them with an induction formula).  You then figure out how large your capacitor needs to be to cancel out this inductance (the formula to figure this out is [0 = (2Ïâ,¬f)?LC -1], where f is the frequency, L is the calculated inductance, and C is the capacitor value.)
Are you sure this is not how you shift phase in a LC circuit between U and I?

A: Actually this is exactly how you shift phase in an LC circuit.  But what must be understood is we have two circuits here - not one.  This is the beauty and genius behind it. 

It helps to remember that there are two forms of an LC circuit - parallel and series.  A series circuit, when placed in resonance, has its resistance (which is actually called impedance) go to zero.  A parallel circuit does the opposite, its impedance goes to infinity.  From this point on, I'm going to call this resistance "impedance".  Impedance is the same as resistance, however, resistance usually only refers to the material properties of the wire.  Impedance is both the material properties and the "charging" resistance (which is what capacitance and inductance do). 

If you work with only a single circuit, the best you can do is be at resonance.  When you reach resonance, the voltage and current will be in phase and max power will be absorbed by your load.  With a single circuit, you can't benefit from the 90 degree phase change because at 90 degree phase, your circuit is not at resonance. 

This is where two circuits come in.  One circuit is a parallel LC circuit.  The other is a series LC circuit.  They are coupled together magnetically.  They both resonant at the same frequency but their impedances are VASTLY different!  Here is the trick - something you cannot achieve in a single circuit alone.  Power will not be absorbed, it will be reflected.  Reflected power goes back to the load.  So you get reflected power with the tremendous force of resonance. 

On the primary side you will want to make sure that your frequency is the same as what you use for your secondary.
I would rather say the other way around. What is in primary is a given from the electric company.

A: I guess what I meant was you want to make sure both circuits have the same resonant frequency.  And no, the primary does not need to be from the electric company - it could be a battery, or generator.

+ or - 90 degrees doesn't matter.
I thought this is how you control the rotation sense.

A: I don't think its variable.  It should be fixed.  So once you start the oscillations, the two circuits will either be +90 degrees out of phase, or -90 degrees out of phase, and will not change but stay which ever it was initially. 

All this means is that when the current is flowing in the first circuit, there will be no current flowing in the second circuit - and vice versa.  Positive or negative just means whichever comes first.  I don't think that matters.  Erfinder could probably elaborate more.

A: Zero resistance means large current, small voltage.
This implies a series LC? How would you consider the secondaries and capacitor? parallel? series?

Related to how it spins:

I'm calling the secondary circuit "series LC" because when you look at how the current flows, all of it goes through the coil and into the capacitor.  Then from the capacitor, through the coil.  In a parallel circuit, the current is shared between the capacitor and the coil - half going to the coil, half going to the capacitor. 

Plus, if you do circuit analysis, you see that the secondary matches a series LC and not a parallel LC. 

This doesn't really depend on how the rotor spins - but it is what makes the rotor spin.

A: Magnetic interaction between the secondary coils and the rotor.  Basically magnetic induction.
A basic magnetic induction gives me a transformer. It should be something more to give me the push in the loose parts (rotor).

A: Basic magnetic induction will also give you a motor.  This took me a long time  before I could visualize it.  But thats because it wasn't taught to me right.  Take an aluminum ring (you can get them from the inside of a hard drive - it's what they use to space the discs apart).  Get a strong rare earth magnet.  Try moving the magnet inside the ring.  You will feel a really strong force when you move the magnet close and pull it away.  Why?

Why is because the ring is a closed loop - a short.  Whatever voltage would normally develop is converted instantly to current which counter acts the movement of the magnet.  If you cut the ring, you won't feel the force anymore, but you'll be able to measure a voltage at either end of the ring.  Apply a voltage to the ends of the ring.  You are basically making it a short again and you will be able to push or pull the magnet. 

This is exactly what a transformer does.  Only a transformer has two wires and no magnets.  One coil pushes, the other pulls.  They go back and forth, just like the magnet and ring did.  A motor doesn't need a permanent magnet to make it rotate.  A ring attached to the side of the rotor's shaft will push and pull against the coils causing it spin.  However, a permanent magnet will make the rotor spin way easier. 

You'll notice, if you do the aluminum ring experiment, that the ring doesn't really push and pull that hard against he magnet.  Not as hard as another magnet of the same strength would.  Thats why permanent magnets on a rotor is better. 

... The device runs on unity.

9. Why?

Thats a good question.  If all your power that goes out comes back, then nothing is lost.  If you put in and get the same thing back, thats unity.  Heres where I have questions.  How is Erfinder over coming wire resistance.  Even if you match everything perfectly, there is a small amount of energy that is wasted in the wire.  You can't change this.  In order to have unity, you would have to compensate for this small amount of energy loss.  How is this done? 

I could understand this being a 99.999% motor but not a pure 100%.  Perhaps this is where the equal masses and octave crap comes into play. 

In short, thats a good question and I don't have the answer!

.....but one must ask the question why bother to have the armature at all and why rotate it.

If I look more carefully to both statements, I would say this is over unity, not just unity.

If you can actually make a motor run and power other devices while at the same time not using any power..... that would be a most amazing achievement! 

[Maximumgravity1]

Barbaosi,

No offense, and no anger in your post.  I saw the sarcasm.  I was posting thoughts and comments that would help dismiss any ideas as such.  For all sarcasm, there is a bit of truth underlying, else it is just non-sensical gibbering.

Anyway, keep on keeping on, I think we are on the right track....


Erfinder said:
Keep your questions simple and well thought out and the answer will be structured and organized....
****Side Note****
In classical circuits a resistance is often used to slow down or use up some of the current flowing through a line.  The same holds true here the only difference is that a capacitor plays the role of the resistance, and at the same time a filter!  It is not about charging nor discharging the capacitor as there is no break point in the circuit! 
****

My simple organized question:
How does a condenser act as a filter, and what is it filtering?

I see some idea of an answer in brnbrade's answer, but the language barrier is a bit tough to overcome - but I appreciate the thoughts and attempts none-the-less.  It seems if there is a resonance developed in the secondaries, this might be along the right paths.

Mainstream would tell us that a condenser is a series of plates (2 in its simplest) separated by a dielectric (insulator).  The charge on one plate is opposite that of the other plate.  The potential difference between the two causes the capacitance (ability to store energy) to store in the electrostatic field formed between the two plates.  WE are also told it produces impedance to alternating current.

I tend to believe this is mostly correct.  I believe it is this impedance that allows for the "tuning" of the circuit.

Moreover, if we view these 12 cores as being the plates of a condenser, then 6 have one charge, while the other 6 have opposite charges.  The impedance between these 12 plates will cause the potential difference to be pretty great.  The electrostatic field formed between these two plates (sets of 6 coils) must be accumulated in the armature (it would make it easier to understand if the armature was not spinning).  But as the potential increases between these plates (both in the secondaries (F & G as well as the sets of 6 plates) it seems that the thought is it will eventually overcome that impedance, and create the phase shift when the potential is great enough.

But I don't know how that acts as a filter, nor do I know what it is filtering.  Best guess is it is filtering the phase between the two circuits (F & G in the secondary condenser and between the 2 sets of 6 coils in the 12 plate condenser, and between the primary coil and secondary coils in the entire circuit).

However, since this is all based on mainstream thoughts, it makes me wonder if any of this is correct??

[Charlie_V]

Well, I don't think you should throw everything you know out the window because someone says "I've got a motor that runs on unity and I'm going to give you a series of riddles and never really address how it works." 

If I had such a device and I wanted to share it with everyone, I would explain in detail what was happening and how it worked.  But thats just me.  And I don't mean this offensively.

Mainstream is not the problem, it is 90% of the populations inability to think outside the box that is.  I don't take any of the theories in my science books as fact.  I read them, understand that many are based on experiments that are completely valid for the ends that they meet.  Are there other ways of explaining these outcomes - absolutely.  Do these experiments and theories explain everything - hell no!  Can there be other experimental setups that would give completely different outcomes - YES.  I am going to say that about 80% of mainstream is worth keeping, the other 20% you can flush.  Law of conservation of energy - valid for closed systems, not valid at all for an open system.  People are taught to think that apples are only good for apple sauce.  They aren't wrong, apples are good for making apple sauce, but you can also make apple pies, apple turnovers, etc.  Learn what you can about apples, then try to make other things besides apple sauce! 

Back to the patent:

Although I feel that it is really the magnetic field moving the rotor, there is something called electrostatic induction.  If you bring a positive charge next to something neutral, the neutral item will become negatively charged.  You can make motors that spin using this principle.  But I don't see where voltage would be when current is flowing in the coils.  There should be very little voltage, only current.  When voltage is in the secondary, it will be across the capacitor.  I think we are ready for discussion with Erfinder....