Bob Boyce TPU thread

[Grumpy]

Try separating the ground of the secondary from the others so that it's output is by pure induction, and no I do not mean "electromagnetic induction".

It may help for all to view these devices as something that pushes the ambiant potential, which pushes back - harder - similar to what Bob has said.  Kinda goes with some of SM's words too.

Grumpy,

I am sorry, but I do not understand.  Right now both the signal generator ground and the secondary coil ground go to Earth ground.  Are you asking me to leave a ground wire floating, and if so, which one?

Also, could you please elaborate on the type of induction (is it electrostatic)?

Thanks!

Eldarion

Yes, like Bruce just said, leave the ground of the secondary separate from the others but connected to load.

DC bias is a "potential" bias, which by the way will produce a standing longitudinal wave of potential along the conductor - in the direction of the conductor.  This "potential" wave will have a frequency and nodes, but there is no current.  NOw this potential can be fluctuated, and now you have a "changing potential".

I supposed "electrostatic" is as good a term as any, even though "static" implies "not moving", which I don't agree with.   Eric Dollard calls it "dielectric current", some have refered to is as "dielectric induction", others "peristaltic induction". etc.

Electrostatic is related to potential (voltage) and frequency.

You can convert the electrostatic into the electromagnetic and back/forth.

I don't have it all figured out yet, but I feel that I'm getting close.  Lot's of failed experiments, but these help our understanding as much or more than the ones that work.

Suppose you pushed a huge standing wave of potential, or in some way cause it to "change"? 

After all, we are all standing in one...

[Earl]

@ All

I just want to make a correction, when everyone is discussing their experiment in the future.

The magnetic bias is the only "bias" Bob refers to.

The secondary is referenced as the High Voltage (160 volts) DC Potential.  Not the HV Bias.  I know this because Bob corrected my calling it a HV bias, some time ago.

Thanks for the precision.  We should all be using the same terminology.

I also believe that one end of the DC potential is ungrounded and "floating".  This is what Earl mentioned some time ago when we were working on the diagram. Again, Bob, please correct me if this is not correct.

Mark's opinion is that the HV DC potential should be connected galvanically to the output in order to supply electrons.  He says the HV DC potential ground can be floating, but says in reality it is grounded, albeit through an ***extremely high*** resistance.  I jokingly call this a ground to Mr. Everest.

The consequence is that one must think about proper safety precautions.  This is why I have suggested using a series current-limiting resistor such that should one come into contact with the HV DC potential the current would be limited to say 1mA, which is way below heart filibration or muscle contraction.

Regards, Earl

[Earl]

[snip]

DC bias is a "potential" bias, which by the way will produce a standing longitudinal wave of potential along the conductor - in the direction of the conductor.  This "potential" wave will have a frequency and nodes, but there is no current.  NOw this potential can be fluctuated, and now you have a "changing potential".

I supposed "electrostatic" is as good a term as any, even though "static" implies "not moving", which I don't agree with.   Eric Dollard calls it "dielectric current", some have refered to is as "dielectric induction", others "peristaltic induction". etc.

I call "changing potential" or changing electrostatic field simply electrodynamic.

Electrostatic is related to potential (voltage) and frequency.
[snip]

I would be more precise and say
Electrostatic is related to potential (voltage) and frequency.
and
electrodynamic is related to potential (voltage) and frequency.

If one wants to split hairs; if the electrodynamic potential never crosses zero although it changes thousands of volts, then it is still DC and therefore has no frequency, even if it looks like an offset sine wave.  It would have to be described as a DC electrodynamic signal with a [superimposed] frequency component of xxxxx Hertz.

Gumpy, I would appreciate it if your peristaltic eye could give a glance at my idea
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2996.msg53229.html#msg53229
and drawing
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2996.0;attach=13362
and let me know what you think?
My hesitation was that if one side of the transmission line was positive and the other side negative, they would tend to cancel out.  My present thinking is that one could imagine a 2-wire open transmission line that is rotated in a circle to be a long rubber balloon with a hole in the end.
The skin of the balloon is the aether tension.  One balloon end is attached to a plate with a photo camera type of shutter.  Now when the shutter is instantaneously opened to a high potential compressed air cylinder, a pulse of air goes blasting into the balloon which immediately cause the skin to greatly expand.  This "pneumatic potential" shock travels longitudinally down the long balloon, steadily increasing its diameter.  The higher the potential, the bigger the diameter of the balloon.  When the balloon becomes fully expanded at the end, the shutter is instantaneously closed and after the air leaves the balloon it returns to its original diameter.  This crazy example shows what happens if the shutter opens too slowly:  a fizzle.  E.g. the faster the rise time the better.  Therefore I am tending to think there is no plus and minus to cancel out, there is only an electrostatic potential at one end (static during the pulse width), which turns into an electrodynamic potential traveling down the transmission line during this time.

Since in theory balloon inflation has no delay, when the first balloon end becomes fully expanded the second balloon receives its shutter opening and immediately expands in perfect timing with the arrival of the first balloon's expansion.  One can see here that the distance from the central electronics to the toroid, while small, may not be negligible if the pulse width is too narrow for the toroid diameter / winding length.  One can also easily visualize a rotating "boa stomach" as the electrodynamic potential travels down the snake in a circle.  Further discussions in Earl's corner, don't want to distract from the main thread.

Regards, Earl

[eldarion]

@ All

I just want to make a correction, when everyone is discussing their experiment in the future.

The magnetic bias is the only "bias" Bob refers to.

The secondary is referenced as the High Voltage (160 volts) DC Potential.  Not the HV Bias.  I know this because Bob corrected my calling it a HV bias, some time ago.

Thanks for the precision.  We should all be using the same terminology.

I also believe that one end of the DC potential is ungrounded and "floating".  This is what Earl mentioned some time ago when we were working on the diagram. Again, Bob, please correct me if this is not correct.

Mark's opinion is that the HV DC potential should be connected galvanically to the output in order to supply electrons.  He says the HV DC potential ground can be floating, but says in reality it is grounded, albeit through an ***extremely high*** resistance.  I jokingly call this a ground to Mr. Everest.

The consequence is that one must think about proper safety precautions.  This is why I have suggested using a series current-limiting resistor such that should one come into contact with the HV DC potential the current would be limited to say 1mA, which is way below heart filibration or muscle contraction.

Regards, Earl

Earl, Grumpy,

Thanks for the explanation, I get it now (finally!)   (Also helped to look at Bob's diagram in D9.pdf)

That is yet another reason why my system is not working--the HV potential gound is hard-wired to the signal generator ground as it has to be in my controller design.  I am now working on a way to temporarily provide an isolated HV potential to the secondary winding, which will most probably involve a battery, an inverter (which has a transformer, which will provide the ground isolation), and a bridge rectifier, just like Bob has in D9.pdf.

Will let everyone know how this turns out...

Eldarion

[MeggerMan]

Hi Bruce,

The magnetic bias is the only "bias" Bob refers to.

This makes perfect sense.

The iron powder toroidal core tests that Dr Mark Snoswell did also used a magnetic bias.
Without the magnetic bias the setup did not produce a significant resonance:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2877.msg49360.html#msg49360

In this post Mark mentions passing 4 amp DC through a coil of 28 turns and I suspect this was the saturation level for this coil as the resonance applitude stop increasing past this current level.
I suppose he could have used about 100 turns at 1 amp to get the same effect - same amp turns - same saturation level.
Bearing in mind that Mark's pulse coil was 5 turns CW then 5 turns CCW so the coil was none inductive.

Regards
Rob