Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".

[gyulasun]

...
You guys look really, really stupid to me.
...

You also look really stupid to me.  If you read through your posts, you grasped for anything you thought could be blamed like Magluvin or my coils are not neat, I connected my coils in series so the test was invalid,  I hold the two coils too close, etc etc.  Do you recall what TinselKoala wrote on your last but one claim? here it is:  "If you think that "the serial input invalidates any results" (sic) I put it to you: Prove it. Get some bolts and some wire and some power supplies, and demonstrate some difference between the "serial input" and the same current through the electromagnets individually."  from this link: http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg357860/#msg357860
 

You have shown no any proof that you are correct. Magluvin and my tests showed the two different coil windings perform the same job. The series bifilar surely has a higher self capacitance but this is not an advantage for a lifting electromagnet. And your making a permanent magnetization for the core of an electromagnet in the nail core test is just ridiculous, just write to and ask David Thomson about it.

When you show a useful thing in practice which are now only in your dreams I will pay attention again. You may have a pulse motor you think performs unusually but you have done a great job to doubt its real performance, for you do not wish to show any proof it is exceptional. 

Gyula

[synchro1]

Temporay permenant core magnetization delays the change in output coil pole shift, and retards the timing by creating magnetic field interference. My placement of permanent diametric magnets in SBC output coils  has produced the same AUL.

@gyulasum,

"your making a permanent magnetization for the core of an electromagnet in the nail core test is just ridiculous".

I uploaded a video demonstrating 2x the magnetic attraction with the SBC. How do you explain that?

[Farmhand]

Synchro, With a DC supply the SBC will act exactly the same as any other regular winding with the same inductance and resistance, the only diffenece will come with the application of currents at a frequency compatible with the resonance frequency of the coil determined by the L/C/ relationship the coil posses. With DC it's just ampere turns and DC resistance.

Gyula is correct, and it is wise to take notice of the educated guys, then after some time you will need to listen to them less.

The patent claims are clear and correct, I see no need for further claims not made in the patent or even by Tesla regarding Tesla's patent, and they are most definitely not Tesla's claims. The claims you make for the "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS" patent coil  Synchro have nothing to do with the patent. Why continue ?

If you have claims then they ought to be demonstrated and documented. Any coil or patented device could conceivably be used for purposes other than is intended.

ie, a bus can be a house. And a hammer can be a plumb bob ect., but so what. Heck I can use a car engine as a boat anchor, good boat anchors used to be P76 Leyland engines. 

Cheers

[synchro1]

What's a "Scrap Yard Magnet" Mr. Sherlock Holmes? No one has explained where the power cord is hidden. So Tesla has a patent for an electromagnet you meat heads can't get to work. What a stupid ass Tesla was! Write Mr. Thompson, he'll tell you your way's no good! Sniveling sops!

[Farmhand]

Anyone who reads the patent closely and understands it will realize how silly your comments are Synchro.

In the first few posts that I did in fact show that the "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS" wind has the intention of securing the correct L and C for the impressed frequency and that with "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS" the extra capacity secured causes the bifilar wound coil to have a lower resonant frequency for the same amount of wire and yet retains the ampere turns and the same inductance as the regular wound coil of the same amount of wire.

The resonant frequency is lower because the serial connected bifilar coil has more inherent self capacitance, and later that because of the "capacitor plate distance" due to the insulation thickness the voltage is a factor relative to the capacitance secured as is stated in the patent.

You are entitled to your opinion Synchro but personal abuse and name calling is uncalled for. Please stop. That is a request for decency.

My own disagreements are not so much with the technical content of the educated folks posts but the seemingly constant misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what I say that some in particular seem to engage in.

Even if you disagree with them or their actions the emphasis should be on the technical matter or the "actions as such" not just a broadside at the persons as insults.

If discussing the patent content, state your case. The focus here should be on the patent and what it says. Not what others would desire to make of it.

If you want to discuss with others about the patent text and meaning, just quote the section of the patent and state your case as "your" case.

Cheers

....