The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

[lumen]

A few days ago I made a new rotating plate with a C core that is as wide as both the I cores (outside end to end). The result was a standard generator action. When coil was on load no matter the RPM the input to prime mover did not go down and the power across the load was exactly reflected back to the prime mover.

So I fail to see what you recommend would be any different?

Luc

Luc:
There are many interesting changes you could do and I suppose we don't know all that you have tried already.
Any results from changes both good or bad could be useful information.

It appears that flipping the flux back and forth through the "C" core requires a fair amount of work.
Do you think it would be the same if you kept the "C" section stationary also and used small iron sections for the switching.

What about if you had two stationary "C" sections forming an X. One on top and one on bottom.
Then used a small iron piece to transfer flux on bottom C and a different iron piece to transfer the flux on top C.
This way none of the cores need to change flux direction and there should be near zero loading from core loss.

Just some ideas.

[MileHigh]

Lumen,

Taking into context my previous posting, you are just clutching at straws.  There is no point in trying some "new flux workaround" when the basic design as it exists right now redirects flux already.  In my opinion there is just no point in going in the directions you are suggesting.

I have another generic comment for your consideration.  When you talk about modifying builds or circuits, if your description is longer than three sentences then forget it.  Nobody can follow a full-paragraph description of a modification to a build or a schematic in their heads.  But they are usually too polite to tell the other person that.  What you end up with is a bullshit conversation where both parties are generating words, but neither party really and truly understands the other party.  Sometimes you see whole threads talking about new pick-up coil positions, and new circuitry, and that "that will generate a big spike here" and "that should recharge your source battery" and it's all bullshit.

Seriously, if it takes more than three sentences then you need a drawing or a schematic preferably with a timing diagram.  I read your prose but I simply don't have a 3D CAD program running in my head.  Please don't be offended, I am just being honest with you.

MileHigh

[gotoluc]

Well MileHigh, out of the builds and tests so far, I would say I'm the only one that supplied the most power data. However, they don't meet your standards or expectations.
As I see it, if someone can't do at least the basic power tests I do, then they are not wanting to give the truth or they just don't know how to do it.  For myself this is all I know to do, so you saying I didn't do a good job is not going to change anything, as I always give as much as I know to do. I have said many times that I have no education and what I know has been self tough.
So the bottom line is, if you want to see more test data then you will have to explain how to do the test you would like to see. Also, you will have to write it in a laymen way as if it gets too technical (needing school education) it won't help.

Regards

Luc

[MileHigh]

Luc:

Everybody has their strengths and weaknesses.  You have very strong build skills but you need to work on your analysis skills.  But like I said, this is not all on you.

The fantasy is that you collectively pool your brain power together so that the whole group is much stronger than any one individual.  I just stated that your first attempt at your analysis is no good.  It's only the first attempt.  All of your peers reading this thread are also reading this.  In theory you can all work together on the project and bounce ideas off each other and move forward together.  When you do that you all will learn off of each other also.  It's almost shocking that nobody can suggest a test method or work with you to analyze the system.  It's just as equally shocking that nobody has anything to say about your first analysis or can suggest a better way to anlyse the data that you have collected so far.

What I do know is that spoon feeding all of you my take on what is taking place will only be about 10% as effective as all of you working together towards a common goal.  You even need to define that goal amongst yourselves.  Likewise, ideally you all would come to some conclusion about your build and the original proposition as shown in the original YouTube clip.  The fantasy is that you can all say, "I UNDERSTAND" like I referenced in another posting on another thread.  In other words you all understand why this works, or why it does not work.

I am just not up to spoon-feeding all of you because almost nothing of that will sink in.  The way for you guys to learn and evaluate a free energy proposition is to do it yourselves.

Where the "I UNDERSTAND" comes into play is that you understand how and why it works, so that when the next proposition comes along that is nothing more than a variation on a very similar theme, then you all will be able to say, "I UNDERSTAND why it will not work."  Get into a real debate with the YouTube guy that is making the proposition.  Have him defend his claims before you even consider making a replication.

This "flux redirecting" stuff is not fundamentally different from a magnet moving past a coil or a coil moving past a magnet.  If you all understood, you would would see what foolishness a proposition like this actually is.

So is this whole project dead already with barely any testing done, or do you as a group on this thread start bouncing ideas off each other and start turning the testing in to something real?

MileHigh

[ramset]

Just a reminder to those unaware this is also being discussed and developed over here


http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19851-topic-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning-8.html#post268994


thx for looking


Chet