Confirmation of OU devices and claims

[Jeg]

Rick
I also have an impedance relative question.
You have kindly shared the rule on how to arrange impedances in a series reactor chain matching, or else the bottleneck effect appears. Does that rule also involves the primary? Don't we have to consider primary as the first reactor of the chain?

Thanks
Jeg     

[Hoppy]

I have mostly got ridicule on this thread so I didn't now what you were doing with the link.

Really I don't think so. You have been treated fairly well, given the many long posts you have delivered and the disrespect aimed at one or two posters on this thread! Strong disagreement should not be confused with ridicule. Our beliefs and experiences are varied and that should be respected. You have put yours on record, which is all that can be achieved in a forum environment.

[rickfriedrich]

I was treated so bad that the moderator called me up and apologized for what was happening. So take that up with him. I have treated everyone with appropriate respect. I have called people out on lies but have also used appropriate humor showing good spirit and not being affected by the abuse. This is not a serious thread and so I adapt to the mood. There is a difference between strong disagreements and ridicule, slander, lies and purposeful insult. There are many examples of both. Yet, even after that I have no problem answering people's questions as if they never said such things. It doesn't bother me what abuse is hurled at me because I care about everyone here and I see past the fallacies and evasions and insults. I can learn from everyone at all times. You make out like long posts are a bad thing being tolerated. These are all answering questions very specifically. Yet most of you will not answer my questions that are fundamental to all these discussions. But the refusal to answer does give every reader the answer.

Really I don't think so. You have been treated fairly well, given the many long posts you have delivered and the disrespect aimed at one or two posters on this thread! Strong disagreement should not be confused with ridicule. Our beliefs and experiences are varied and that should be respected. You have put yours on record, which is all that can be achieved in a forum environment.

[rickfriedrich]

Thank Jeg,
First point: The negative series impedance chain only has the bottleneck when limitations I mention when you are doing the untuned basic level that I show with the open parts. Of course when you are doing the ideal ways there would be no bottlenecking as everything would be in perfect balance. The basic level is just using parts off the shelf you have laying around. Still gives a lot of gain, but you have to watch the reflections and therefore be prepared to change out your semiconductors often while you learn this. Don't bother soldering them into a board, just put them on a terminal strip.

Secondly: We actually have one option called the MICK where we put another inductor (no special values in that) between the input positive and charging negative terminal and the motor for some added benefits. Makes it resemble my Benitez Switch 7 model more. So in that case that would be the first reactor in the chain. But yes, also the motor.

The thing is that there are many things that can be done and considered. There are 1000 changes or improvements I could make to these motors. There is no end to improving little things here and there. But my point is always been to do what is easy and focus on the points that matter. It is relatively easy to multiply many reactive bodies with their respective loads to accomplish the nonlinear reactive Tesla systems where energy can be multiply and shuttled around in different ways. Often people ask what is your circuit or system, and what can I answer to that. There are many options and many different systems. If you look at the 50 or so diagrams of Tesla's one wire systems you will see some of the many options. When you realize how they can be combined together, which is implied by several of them, then you can see how one prime mover can just be added to, while it also can be maintained under perfect balance or equilibrium. And that brings us back to that Kron page and the ideal transmission line...

Rick
I also have an impedance relative question.
You have kindly shared the rule on how to arrange impedances in a series reactor chain matching, or else the bottleneck effect appears. Does that rule also involves the primary? Don't we have to consider primary as the first reactor of the chain?
Thanks
Jeg   

[gyulasun]

Rick,

You have 'demanded' answers from me on certain questions while you avoid  some of my questions to answer, so fifty-fifty... 
And I note that I prepared most of this answer this morning,  so your last but one post of #1192 above did not exist.   

Anyway, this is what I wrote back then in my reply to you: https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535318/#msg535318 

I show scepticism with any extraordinary claim which is not proved in practice with measurements correctly, and
this latter is not the case yet with your setup.  I never wrote that obtaining excess energy is not possible at all.
I do have an open mind and I believe that a circuit setup can surely be built which can produce extra energy
compared to its input we feed in. 
So far your setup in question does not seem to produce any extra output.  Did you use your light meter for checking
LED bulbs brightness in front of the 18 people?  Did you calibrate your LED bulbs in advance with measured DC input
power to know what power level is involved at the certain brigthnesses of the LEDs?

So why I believe that extra enegy is possible to obtain from a device / circuit is that not everything has been discovered in science and there can be unknown anomalies to be discovered and utilized.  And what I put in bold above is what you neglected to answer.  It is ok that 18 people were present but if they watched the brigthness of the LEDs by their naked eye it is not science Rick. 


Your other question to me has been: "is there any real gain with resonance?" and you said twice that I avoided answering it. 

First I note that back then when you appeared in this thread with your first post, the actual ongoing topic was in connection with your resonance kit.  I stress this and will explain the why later on below.

Well, in fact I included my answer on the gain in question when I answered here :
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535273/#msg535273  I quote my answer, first I quote your text for which I answered:

from https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253
These bigger coils naturally have higher Q which translates to higher actual gain.
And yes, resonance IS A GAIN. Don't let people fool you about that.

But you need to clarify what you mean on gain: voltage, current, power, energy gain?
I would agree with voltage or current gain in resonant LC circuits.
If you claim power (or energy) gain too, then you would need to demonstrate it by measurements.

So this was my answer on gain in resonant LC circuits used in your setup shown in the video.

Here is what is your stance on gain in resonant LC circuits:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535303/#msg535303 

Anyway, if resonance is a gain in the sense that a series tank circuit is actually a "multiplication" or "amplification of voltage" WHILE AMPERAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, or parallel tank circuits are  a "multiplication" or "amplification of amperage" WHILE VOLTAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, then the gain is seen as the voltage or amperage divided by the input amount. So if I have 9V at 25ma input and 250V at 25ma circulating with the regular frequency generator I then have 27 times gain. And if I add the gate driver and have 1300V with the same 25ma then I have 144 times gain. This follows the idea of the gain in Q or quality factor for the both parts (cap and inductor) combined (if one of them has a low Q it brings down the combined as I deliberately did with the cap to keep things safe). So as some textbooks would imply without prejudice, the Q at a given frequency will determine your gain IF YOU LET IT DO THAT FOR YOU AND DON"T KILL IT WITH MAINSTREAM CIRCUITRY THAT DESTROYS THE PROCESS. So it can be seen here that what you go into this will be what you get out. If you expect this to be merely a transformer process then the word resonance and words like gain, are deceptions and meaningless. 

and I continue quoting you from your reply#550:

Now this is a gain of not only efficiency but of useable energy. Why? Because of something the college textbooks will not want to admit. That the circulating current in series tank circuit is equal or more to the input current while the voltage is amplified. Most admit that it is a voltage amplification or multiplication but they avoid stating the other part about the amperage because they want to give the wikipedea idea that this is merely a transformer process where voltage goes up and amperage goes down. Essentially equating resonance with transformer processes. The mistaken notion is further stated as merely a building idea where the oscillations merely accumulate the energy over time. On the contrary, the circulating amperage is at least the same as the input amperage, while the circulating voltage is multiplied. Now the radiation from the inductor is real and can be used as such (as we can see with hundreds of coils all around). The electrical can also be used as we see with the one wire output and several other methods.

In my answer #1130 I gave the other day to Nick I described why the use of a gate driver enhances the resonant voltage and current: 

the output pin of the IC has a much lower output impedance (around 1 Ohm) versus the 50 Ohm output of the function generator so the same 10 V output from the IC is able to drive a higher current into the series LC TX circuit. The 50 Ohm of the FG simply limits the maximum current in the LC circuit the same 10 volt would drive into the series  LC circuit, compared to the 1 Ohm of the gate driver IC.

And now comes the question of the phase angle between the current and voltage in a resonant LC circuit you have not given a straigth answer. I mentioned this to you here:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535367/#msg535367

The problem is you do not consider the phase angle between the 1300V coil voltage and the coil current: In a
resonant LC circuit they never happen simultaneously but nearly with 90 degree phase difference, coil current lags
coil voltage. So the real or average power is nowhere near what you imply in your text. There is no any instant
when the current has a high peak amplitude whenever the 1300V peak to peak voltage is also present across the coil.
You have a voltage gain and voltage is not power or energy in itself.
And when you consider the phase angle, then power should be estimated by P=V x I x cos(phi) where V and I the RMS
values and phi is the phase angle.
And when the loaded Q remains relatively high then the phase angle may remain close to 90 degree so its cos(phi)
value will reduce the power value significantly. (i.e. suppose phi=88° then cos88°=0.0348 will be the multiplier in the power formula).
Of course you will not care about this fact.  But the phase angle in AC power estimation is one of the key factors.
This is why careful power measurements should be done.  Obviously the measurements at 1.15 MHz can be very difficult, this is why I mentioned DC current and voltage measurements for the LED bulbs after a full wave rectifier. Power loss in the diode bridges can be easily estimated.

Here is your answer from https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535396/#msg535396 : 

So again we are all wanting know G, is there any real gain with resonance? We can deal with the phasing later.

and you then simply brought in Stan Meyer's HHO setup to explain away the phase angle issue. In Meyer's setup the reactive current between the plates of the capacitor is submerged in water is used for water splitting as part of a resonant LC circuit. Yes, this is possible that you utilize capacitive current, here the phase angle does not matter between capacitor current and the resonant voltage across the coil from the resulting HHO point of view. But in your resonance kit you simply have no any means to reuse reactive current in your LC circuits. This is why I stressed above the ongoing topic have always been your resonant kit setup and not another setup.  And you stormed at me on my bad science...     

Here is what you wrote to me: https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535396/#msg535396

Can there be any gain resulting from this oscillation? It is evident that you do not want to commit to this as YOU ARE EVADING THE QUESTION. Maybe you don't want others to know you really do believe that. In fact you implied that in a circuit you expected to find some gain or something one day. But you never answered me if that was a hope or if you had any concrete reason for that sentence. So here I make that question more specific. And let me tell you people, if he every does commit to that answer, unless he just says I don't know, he will be either done with this Forum or will have to accept so many things. Now I have explained that you can use the cap as a fuel cell at the same time that it is functioning as a series tank circuit. Stan M did this many years ago, and this is rather easy to do once you condition the plates to become a capacitor. So you can easily get at least 3 times the gas production of electrolysis for the same input. Now you can also draw electrical energy off of that with the Don Smith effect idea (or what people call the Tesla Hairpin circuit). Now people don't show this, but I say to you you can also have the coils be used as a transmitter to do the very things we are doing in this setup. And as we have the frequent saying around here, if you are going to impulse a coil you may as well... push a magnet, and you may as well... (about 7 things we are up to now). Oh but now my friends. G tells you the phase angle doesn't allow you to do anything with gains created within the tank circuit but maybe act as the various filters. Nope, don't make that cap a Stan M. high voltage resonance fuel cell!

One more thing on the phase angle issue: you neglect Itsu's recent tests on measuring average power in resonant LC circuit. Also when TK again referred to the neccessity of considering phase angle, all your answer was: "Phase shift is very important to understand." 

Rick you have bad science if you do not consider the phase angle between current and voltage in resonant LC circuits you showed in your video when estimating real or average power in them and eventually at the outputs of the RX units. And the EM field created around your TX coil can only include the same energy content the LC circuit includes, so when you utilize the EM field by the loaded satellite coils, they can receive so much too. This is why your claimed extra output should be proved, it is bad science if you only mention the electrons coming from the ground wire or mention sympathetic resonance etc.  All your coils dissipate and so do your LED bulbs. 

Itsu measurements and Seaad circuit simulations clearly showed a real performance of less than unity, TK's videos with measurements also reveal power relations in resonant LC circuits.  You asked why I accept them and not accept your claims (I have double standard):  well this is very simple, you have not provided any detailed measurements like they have had.  (Please do not start it again on faked videos, lies from forum members etc. ) 

Gyula