A-King 21 - build discussion /investigation

[a.king21]

Grumage:  Not  very useful as it detracts from the principle of operation which is the Don Smith effect.  It s useful if a phase locked loop is applied to the initial coil which is stage 1 of the process.  Stage 2 is the DSE proper.


The principle of operation in the first two stages of the Don SMith process is known as the DSE.  This is actually a Carlos Benitez invention from his first patent in 1914.  It is called electrostatic induction. If you pulse one plate of the capacitor then the other plate gets an equal and opposite charge from the ambient background.  This could be the air, a plate or the chassis of the device or an earth ground.
it is NOT capacitative coupling which is to be avoided.
The DSE works much better during the day than at night.  ( I have proved it). this is because there are more electrons available in the day due to sun activity.
Depending on the electron activity in your location it works better on high ground as electron activity is greater the higher your location above sea level.
The DSE is buy one get one free minus system losses.


HAVE AT IT.


My thanks to Rick Friedrich and his Don Smith book for doing all the hard work. Well done sir you have my eternal thanks.

[Grumage]

My apologies.

I was merely pointing Mr AlienGrey to the reference given by Mr TinselKoala.

There will be no more interference from the " cheap seats. "   

Cheers Grum.

[a.king21]

......
the other thing is the circuit you show produces a sine wave would it be any better or worse using a negative going pulse ?

If you look at item 5 in the original diagram you wil see a spark gap.  This is designed to produce the disruptive discharge which Tesla talked about. So yes you are correct.

[TinselKoala]

If you look at item 5 in the original diagram you wil see a spark gap.  This is designed to produce the disruptive discharge which Tesla talked about. So yes you are correct.

Maybe I'm going blind but the only spark gap I see in the whole pdf is the one in the very first diagram Figure 1, the Don Smith alleged diagram. This is not going to produce what Tesla called a disruptive discharge, and that brings up another of my pet peeeves. Whatever you have been talking about it isn't a Telsa Disruptive Discharge. You've been listening to Master Ivo, haven't you. You might think so, but this apparatus cannot produce a real disruptive discharge in any of the schematics or described constructions in the pdf.  If you want to see how to produce a real Tesla disruptive discharge it takes a little more than winding some wire around a mailing tube. See the work of George Trinkaus if you actually want to do that.

And of course the authors of the paper DID NOT USE that diagram, or that spark gap. "The study was conducted according to the schematic in Fig. 2" which is a simple Slayer Exciter, with NO spark gap.  Neither did they have a spark gap in any of the other Slayer Exciter circuits Figures 3-6.

When one does a "replication", one replicates the work actually done, yes? Not some speculative schematic that does not even relate to what is being actually built by the original claimants.

[TinselKoala]

My apologies.

I was merely pointing Mr AlienGrey to the reference given by Mr TinselKoala.

There will be no more interference from the " cheap seats. "   

Cheers Grum.

You can lead a horse to water.....   

And I've said what I'm saying too.  I'm sure Master Ivo and RF can help AKing get his don smith device running.

But will it be OU?  I guess you will just have to ask somebody else, because the only overunity I know about is Joules Out > Joules In. So you'll have to use somebody else's definition if you want OU.

I see where this is going. I can't be a party to misrepresentation, false claims and uncorrected error.