Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)

[citfta]

Thanks for the explanation.  I understand now what you meant.  I think what you are describing would more accurately be called an electrostatic motor rather than a capacitor.

[tinman]

What are you talking about here?  What is the self acting tendency of a cap and how do you restrain it to represent a resistance equal to the ma that you wish to allow to transfer?  None of that makes any sense to me.  And how does a cap "snap" the rest of the way to what?  Again, I don't understand what you are talking about.  I have worked in electronics for over 50 years and I have never heard of those terms used when talking about a capacitor.  Do you have some kind of reference for what you are talking about?

I have to agree with you citfta,as i also have no idea what Webby is talking about ?.

I thought my question was simple 
The answer being-the only way to charge the cap to 4 volt's faster,is to increase the current flowing into it.

Brad

[tinman]

Here is a thought experiment i posted on OUR


We have a coil with a FWBR attached to it's output leads,so as to rectify to DC.
We then have a cap across the FWBR output,so as to collect the energy produced by the coil.
Lets say that the cap is 100uF.

Test one
We now disconnect one end of the coil from the FWBR,so as we can do an open voltage test.
We move the magnet passed the coil as a set speed,and obtain an open voltage across the coil of say 5 volt's.
We now hook the coil back up to the FWBR,and move the magnet across that coil at the same speed as the open voltage test,and we end up with-say 3 volts across the 100uF cap. So our coil voltage has been limited to 3 volt's-plus the V drop across the FWBR.

Now we replace the 100 uF cap with a 200uF cap.
Now,we know that is we pass the magnet across the coil at the same speed as test one,we will not get 3 volt's across the cap.
BUT-if we pass the magnet across the coil faster,will we be able to get 3 volt's across the 200uF cap ?


Brad

[tinman]

I find that lines of force are a very logical explanation and seem to work well with understanding the field in practice.

Like contour line's on a map,that show elevations --but we know that there really are no such line's on the land mass it self.

There must be a mechanism that is the producer of the N and S polarities.

Once again,N and S are only a means to indicate direction of flow,much like the suction and delivery sides of a water pump.

Can you see the fluid?

Do not confuse fluid with liquid 

There is no finite definition of what makes up a magnetic field.

Well no,there is not.
I have my own theory,which i have shared here on a number of occasions now,where i believe the magnetic field produced by a PM say,is a field of positive and negative charge's-where what you call north maybe a positive charge,and what you call south maybe a negative charge.
Two positive charges(N&N) will appose each other,two negative charges(S&S) will appose each other,but a positive and negative charge(N&S) will attract each other.

An increasing negative charge(S) through a coil will cause an EMF of one polarity across that coil,and an increasing positive charge(N) will cause an EMF of the opposite polarity across that coil-and the opposite polarity for a decrease of each charge.

How do we know if the fluid idea that replaces the field lines theory isnt just made up so that we may never fully understand magnetic fields for what they really are?

Who has shown any signs of there being !field line's! ,that is not flawed ?.

Just because we cant see lines of force, it isnt evidence that they do not exist.

The scientific method is-we must prove something exist's,not that it must exist because we cant see it,or cant prove it.
We cant see oxygen,but we can prove it exist's.

[Magluvin]

Do not confuse fluid with liquid 


I have my own theory,which i have shared here on a number of occasions now,where i believe the magnetic field produced by a PM say,is a field of positive and negative charge's-where what you call north maybe a positive charge,and what you call south maybe a negative charge.

Hey Brad

I had some of these conversations back nearly 10 yrs ago at another site that was mostly made to study the Whipmag motor. At least that is mostly what was discussed. I see it more fluid and more like air as the field is compressible, most liquids are not. And Air is more considered a fluid than a liquid. I see it like bubbles that only really interact with other bubbles. Some bubbles attract and others repel.

An interesting discussion we had was the possibility of the spinning stator magnets sort of communicating with each other through the bubbles of the rotor magnets. There were 2 diametric mags on bearings that were in sync with the spinning rotor and one stator of the same flicked in reverse after the rotor was spun up and it would actually lock in sync, in reverse with the rotor. It was just a hunch as we were trying all our best to figure the thing out and get one working. But I can imaging that 3 stators possibly being slightly altered in their synced rotor motion by way of the chain of magnets around the rotor. I really enjoyed those days.


Mags