Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[tinman]

The "velocity" of flux movement through a material is relatively constant.

The "rate of change" of the flux is what partly determines the induced E field and hence induced emf.

The terms "velocity" and "rate of change" are no where near equal, and should not be confused.

If anything, "rate of change" might be equated with "acceleration", but certainly not "velocity".

That is correct.
As the phase between the primary and two secondaries remain 180* out of phase,then the rate of change must be the same between the 3. As the turn ratios are all 1:1,and the inner secondary has a 200% gain in voltage to that of the primary and outer secondary,then the flux velocity must be higher through the inner secondary.

So let me explain it like this-->or try to.
Lets say we have a car with drive wheels with a  circumference of say 1.5 meters(our outer transformer winding),and this car has to travel down the road at 100KPH(our frequency) The drive wheels would have to have a spin velocity of X amount(our voltage). Now we change our drive wheel circumference to a smaller size,say 1 meter(our inner secondary),but we need to keep the vehicle moving at 100KPH(our frequency). So now our drive wheels have ? spin velocity in order to keep our speed(frequency) at 100KPH.

[tinman]

The "velocity" of flux movement through a material is relatively constant.

The "rate of change" of the flux is what partly determines the induced E field and hence induced emf.

The terms "velocity" and "rate of change" are no where near equal, and should not be confused.

If anything, "rate of change" might be equated with "acceleration", but certainly not "velocity".

The terms "velocity" and "rate of change" are no where near equal, and should not be confused.

Quote wikipedia: The velocity of an object is the rate of change of its position with respect to a frame of reference, and is a function of time. Velocity is equivalent to a specification of its speed and direction of motion

So velocity !is! exactly that-the rate of change of it's position.

[tinman]

It's clearly not a 1:1 turn ratio transformer.  This has been discussed many times.  Several ideas and suggestions have been floated about the observed voltages.  You have the device, and it's incumbent upon you to figure out the true reason and explain it using conventional terminology.

The books and theories apply 100% to the HTT.  You are just saying that because you want to believe it but you have no evidence for that.  That's a fail that you need to stop making.

No, there is no such thing as referring to magnetic flux through a core as having a "velocity."

I have given you the opportunity MH to explain the voltage gain using your standard book physics,and you just past the buck. Once again we have a situation like that of the magnetic field it self--Your all experts on it,but have no idea what it is. But still(even though you cannot explain it using the conventional),you insist that what i put forth is wrong and nonsense-even though it makes perfect sense. Just another case where if it dosnt agree with the book's,it's just rubbish.

Here we have a case where flux velocity and rate of change are two separate thing's,and because your lack of understanding on this difference,you decide to call my theory/explanation rubbish.

So i ask once again,using your current theories and understanding's,explain the 200% voltage gain on the inner secondary to that of the applied voltage to the primary,where the turn ratio IS 1:1.

[Drak]

It's clearly not a 1:1 turn ratio transformer.

Are you saying that tinman miscounted his turns on his inner coil by twice as much? That is one hell of an error to have a 200% counting error. That means that instead of 70 turns he miscounted and actually put 140 turns. I don't believe that. The only other reason I can think of to merit that statement is you must  think he is purposely lying about his inner turns.

Wow.

[tinman]

It's clearly not a 1:1 turn ratio transformer.    You have the device, and it's incumbent upon you to figure out the true reason and explain it using conventional terminology.

 

An extreme case of the pot calling the kettle black here

It's clearly not a 1:1 turn ratio transformer.

Bullshit. I bult the thing,I counted the turns on all 3 windings(70 turns each),and made them all the same for this very reason-as it was also noted in my first toroid transformer build. So the second time round i made sure the turn ratio was exactly 1:1:1-->are you calling me a liar ?.

This has been discussed many times.  Several ideas and suggestions have been floated about the observed voltages.

Please repost said post's that gave reason using conventional transformer theory that explains the 200% increase in voltage of the inner secondary to that of the two outer windings.

The books and theories apply 100% to the HTT.

I am yet to see this on this thread-or anywhere else.

You are just saying that because you want to believe it but you have no evidence for that.  That's a fail that you need to stop making.

I am afraid that so far MH,the fail has been on the part of yourself and standard transformer theory.
You say that my theories are rubbish,and yet your so called !knowns! have failed to show the goods.

No, there is no such thing as referring to magnetic flux through a core as having a "velocity."

Absolute rubbish.
Velocity:
1:  is a vector quantity that refers to "the rate at which an object changes its position."
2: The velocity of an object is the rate of change of its position with respect to a frame of reference, and is a function of time.

In the case of flux velocity,the !object! is the magnetic domains within the core material,and NOT the rate of change of the field it self.
Thus the phase relationship between the inner and outer secondaries remains the same,but the flux velocity through the inner secondary is higher,resulting in a higher voltage output from the inner secondary.

It is almost laughable MH that you rubbish my theories,while at the same time your !book! theories have no answer.