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

[jbignes5]

It was interesting,, a new view on stuff and I like new views.

Which current is the fake current?

The counter forces in a normal coil. Cemf in other words. It's a counter force to applied emf. When the opposing winds are used it shorts out the cemf and uses it to load the coil with additional voltage in the capacitance. But this cap is not the standard capacitor and can not hold the voltage for very long. Only as long as there is an emf going. I suspect it also tightens up the winds as well like in normal capacitors. So care should be used in securing the winds so that it will not ruin the insulation on the chosen wire, if you use a solid core copper magnet wire. A solid electrical wire should be used because this kind of coil is specific to the impulse currents Tesla was interested in. Oil being an excellent insulator could be used but Since Tesla was interested in cooling this kind of coil down to reduce the resistance so that nothing was impeding the emf at all.


When I was talking about noise cancellation I was talking in reference to the beck emf we usually see after pinging a solenoid. If you use a bifilar serial wound emitter primary then a solenoid could be used as a secondary with little effect to the primary emf. This is because of the doubling of the coils. As the second wind of the bifilar is getting the emf it kinda negates the bemf from the secondary. Well that is my thinking and what we usually see in the Gene Gene application. It doesn't have to be a flat pancake at all. It could be wound on a iron core or any Ferris material. The core is to remove as much magnetism from the transformation. With the secondary being the current generator based on mass of the secondary.


The one problem with impulse power is that it is so sudden. The gauge of the primary must be taken into account because if you drop to far in gauge the impulses tend to swell the metal so much that atoms break apart from each other. But that is if you use extreme voltages like 1 million volts, which Tesla was more then comfortable using..


Remember the taping of the kid on a swing saying well impulses would be a tap. Time it right and you could get this thing up to extreme voltages. Resonance also works in hitting an object. Match the resonant condition of anything metal and blammo, bad things happen. This is where Tesla was experimenting with resonance and buildings and wires. He wanted to know how this could effect matter around the tapper. His whole line of experiments moved from one thing to the next trying to unlock the secrets of resonant rise and the effects on matter around that rise. This included transformers as well which includes coils.

[Magluvin]

Been following the latest conversation....

Was just on YT for a bit and seen this vid once again, I think its was presented a while back here at OU, but I feel the need to put it up again.

What would be interesting is to try this config to see what happens to the input and also loading. He never got into that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7QiI8p1gi4

Mags

[tinman]

 author=jbignes5 link=topic=17297.msg507883#msg507883 date=1499093377]

No I am not missing anything, the Title is pretty specific:
"Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)"
The example given is the style of a joule thief and not magnets passing a coil.

Then why are you bringing up bifilar coils,when the JT has nothing to do with bifilar coils.

"The JT dose not use a bifilar winding,such as Tesla intended a bifilar wound coil to work."
The Joule thief uses interposing winding as does the bifilar winding. It uses the same sympathetic generation scheme. Yes, it wasn't a Tesla intended but it is still the same none the less.

It's not the same at all.
Please show where Tesla used one of his windings in his bifilar coil,to switch on a circuit component.

As usual you cut the last bit off of the title which clearly states an example of Joule thief.
Also there is a big difference between magnetic induction and electric induction.

Please show induction where there is one without the other.
There is no such thing as electric induction,or magnetic induction-->it is electromagnetic induction.

I posted enough information for you to investigate it. Don't read or follow links?

I see only links relating to Tesla,making magnet's,and magnetic fields effecting plasma--none of which are relevant to the JT.

Perhaps you had better go back to the start of the thread,and see how passing a magnet passed a coil at different speed's actually came about,and how that test !IS! relevant to this topic.

This is the problem. You say it is an illusion but yet it negates this counter force for real.

No it dose not.

That means it gets rid of it and it is not an illusion.

Do you know what would happen if the CEMF(your counter force) was removed ?

Because the coil has capacitance built in it negates the counter force. End of story.

Once again-no it dose not.
It only reduces the resonant frequency of the inductor--and has nothing to do with a JT.

First you say it has capacitance then you say here that it is so little. More double speak.

It's not !double speak! at all--and that's double talk BTW.
A bifilar coil such as Tesla's design,dose have a capacitance value between the two coil's-->but it is !SMALL! in value--pF only,depending on the size of the coil.

This is what it has. The capacitance is a real time capacitance meaning it lasts as long as there is a voltage potential in the coil. This mirrors the capacitance in a capacitor. This is done by laying two conductors side by side or two channels that can do two things. One: induce a voltage into the second conductor of opposite polarity and create a capacitance between those two conductors much like is done in a traditional capacitor as high as the wires insulation can stand.

Your getting yourself all confused.
I thought you were talking about Tesla's bifilar coil,where both coil's are connected in series,and both have the same polarity.
When you have two seperate coil's wound on an inductor,and induce one with a current,then the coupling between the two is electromagnetic mostly,with only less than 1% (at best) being capacitive coupling

No gains that you or anyone else will admit to. That doesn't make it any less true.

It makes it very true,until such time as it can be shown that THs transformers had an efficiency of COP 1+--and TH has never shown a transformer with an efficiency of + 100%--thats a fact.

"Are you saying the magnetic field around a PM,is plasma ?"

Yup! A cold plasma that can be revealed by an intense voltage field.

How is showing a plasma produced by an electric field,any type of proof that the magnetic field around a PM is plasma?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B-lKgcQJvg

Title--Plasma in Magnetic Field

OK,now i see where you are confused.

The video shows how plasma reacts in a magnetic field.
It is not showing that a magnetic field is plasma.

Now a few things to remind you of here. The air is being pumped out. A straight vacuum. Now no vacuum is perfect but yet plasma is still "created", your word not mine. See plasma is the medium. For the most part it is in a state we like to call as dark mode. This makes it invisible because there is no real energy in it. But it is capable of conducting voltages and form around magnetic fields. In the example video I have shown they are merely intensifying the plasma already around the magnets. This shows the structure of the plasma and the density of that plasma that is locked into the magnets material, this is done upon creation of the magnet.

You do know that plasma is an ionized gas consisting of positive ions and free electrons.
Now how do you think electrons may act around a PM ?
Quote:  ionized gas, a gas into which sufficient energy is provided to free electrons from atoms.

"Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design."

As i have asked once already--please post reference to these test's,but in stead,you tell me to look at the links you provided,which were on Tesla,and how magnets are made.

AT "RESONANCE" is a very important key.
.

First off,the joule thief dose not operate at resonance,and as you wish to stay on topic,how or what dose resonance have to do with a joule thief?

Do you see how they are talking about "VOLTAGE" only here. That is another key aspect that people would rather not concentrate on

A joule thief dose not operate on voltage alone-nor dose anything else.
So more irrelevant !double speak!

W=V*I  Raise either V or I and there is an increase in W     Hmmm..

W?-->watt's?
I see you need I in there,so what happened to voltage only?.--How many watts from V only?.

To reduce the resistance of the wire itself, even Tesla was trying to negate that as well:

1-larger gauge wire
2-use hollow copper tube for high power/high frequency devices.
3- use silver wire
4-invent super conductive wire.

Pay attention to the reason why he wanted to do this. To harness the free oscillations that a free oscillating capacitor discharge emits. Getting rid of the cemf is only part of the process. Reducing the wires resistance is another.

Pay close attention
1-A capacitor dose not oscillate,unless in an LC circuit.
2- If you have an inductor that you send current through,then you also have CEMF--regardless of the winding capacitance.

Read it multiple times to get the gist of this.

Please show an inductor/coil,that has a voltage dropped across it,void of CEMF

Think about this now. If you can harness a freely oscillating capacitor through a coil that has negated cemf and lowered resistance then would the secondary reduce the oscillation?

Dont need to think about it,as the answer is straight forward.
A coil cannot and dose not negate CEMF-regardless of winding capacitance.

This is the reason Tesla devised the disruptive discharge circuit. It negates the feedback to the capacitor via a magnetic pathway across the spark gap. This separates the capacitor from the emitter coil and allows the circuit to continue oscillating away

.

Perhaps first learn and understand how the Tesla coil work's,then get back to us.

The bifilar method is another way to get rid of the return feedback in the transformer.

No it's not.

When the secondary responds the bifilar is going through the second pass through the coil and negates the response from the secondary. All with one blast from a cap.

The Tesla bifilar coil has no secondary.

Removed all the !double speak! about noise cancellation,as it is irrelevant to the topics subject.


Brad

[citfta]

jbignes5,

You should pay attention to Brad.  He is correct in all that he has posted in reply to your post.  You are very confused about the bifilar coils and what they can and can't do.  There is a thread here where they were very thoroughly investigated to see what if any special qualities they might have.

The only special quality the bifilar has is the extra capacitance between the turns of the coil.  And this is only if you connect it up as a series connected bifilar coil.  Otherwise the capacitance is the same as if it were a normal coil.  Connect the two windings in parallel and the extra capacitance is gone because the higher voltage between turns is gone.  And as Brad has said the extra capacitance is very small.

And Brad is also correct that the only effect the extra capacitance has is to lower the normal resonant frequency of the coil.  It DOES NOT do away with the CEMF.  I can't imagine where you got that idea.  There is so much false information being put on YouTube that you really shouldn't be using YouTube as a source of information.  Go back to some good electronics books such as the American Radio Relay League Radio Operators handbook.  Or ARRL handbook for short.  You can get a cheap copy on Ebay.  Then you can learn about how electrical circuits really work.  Or start studying a good online electronics course.

Brad and I both are actively seeking evidence of overunity.  I believe OU is possible and I think Brad does also.  But if it exists it won't be found by following the false information being promoted by so many on YouTube.  You can do the experiments for yourself to see that a lot of what is posted is simply not true.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[web000x]

jbignes5,

You should pay attention to Brad.  He is correct in all that he has posted in reply to your post.  You are very confused about the bifilar coils and what they can and can't do.  There is a thread here where they were very thoroughly investigated to see what if any special qualities they might have.

I feel like this investigation was fairly short lived considering the encouragement from a certain few individuals regarding this concept.  I'm still working on this as I don't think this investigation of bifilar coils has been fully vetted.