The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

[Feynman]

Okay, first of all, I have just read through the entire thread.  Paul, I think your ideas here are excellent. You should not listen to detractors who have nothing to contribute.   

Update:

I have finished the Arduino microcontroller protocol, including the implementation and circuitry.  The device is called Gemini.  I will tell you how to build it with full plans and part list for free.  If you want I can also build one for you.  Gemini is far better then 555 timers.  It has four internal precision oscillators, and generates square waves 1khz - 67Mhz with rise time of 2ns or less (two billionth of a second).  You can set the oscillation frequencies from your computer over USB.  You can use Gemini to drive most any N-channel MOSFET or small signal vacuum tube. 

This is what I think now and why:

Background:

1) The TPU devices are 100% real.
Other people have elaborated on these reasons better than I can.

2) The "magnet activation" was a ruse.
I think this was a reed switch or hall IC which closed the initial loop.  This goes along with SM's deceptive flair.

3) SM intended to make billion$ on the device.
This explains why he did as much as he could to protect the secret of its workings.  However, he did give away  some vague and general information.

4) SM's technical ability is consistently underestimated.
From reading the e-mail correspondence, it is clear SM had extensive hands-on EE knowledge.


Technical:

1) The TPU is an active device.
What I mean by this is I believe the TPU is not a passive device like an LC tank; instead, I assume it has active switching electronics (MOSFETs or tubes). 

2) The TPU control coils use DC, not AC.
I think these devices work by induction of a longitudinal and/or magnetic component which rotates inside the TPU.  The reason I say DC is for several reasons.  First, the circuitry is simpler than AC.  Second, SM seems to suggest kicks come from DC, when he quotes how Tesla observes radiant energy at Edison's DC power plant. 

When the old Edison DC generators were turned on, back in the day, they released this 'kick' and killed many workers in the process.
...
[Tesla] discharged capacitors into stout wire and through a spark gap.
The key to the kick's strength and appearance was in how fast Tesla discharged the capacitors into the spark gap AND how fast Tesla STOPPED the flow of current AT the spark gap.
-Steven Mark

SM is talking about the kicks appearing on a spark gap during a sharp gradient of DC current.  As aleks mentioned,  a spark gap discharge will resemble a saw wave (sharp Tr, softer Trr).  But SM states here that stronger kicks come from also stopping the current flow as quickly as possible.  This must imply a SQUARE wave... sharp ON, sharp OFF.


3) SM's devices used SQUARE waves (not SINE!).

"I assumed that anyone working on technology this sophisticated would have a superior
knowledge of electronics and an understanding of PURE frequency output being a Necessity to
control the reactions going on inside the collector.
-Steven Mark"

  SM mentions pure frequency.  Pure frequency is not necessarily sine.  There are four major pure frequencies: SINE, SQUARE, SAW, and TRIANGLE.  We have ruled out SINE because it does not contain the sharp gradient.  But let's examine another aspect anyway... sine waves have 30% less energy  square waves!    A "phat" bassline is almost always saw or square waves. 

Example:


The simplest and most robust wave that can be generated in electronic circuits are square waves. These would have also been easy to generate using components from the early 1990s.  To review again why I think SM's TPUs cannot be using sine waves, and is instead must be using square waves (or perhaps saw).

A) Sine waves do not contain a sharp gradient (Tesla's spark gap,etc).
B) Sine waves have 30% less energy than square waves.
C) Sine waves are much more difficult to generate in circuits.
D) Sine waves rate of change is too slow (dV/dT is not steep)
E) Square waves have highest energy content.
F) Square waves contain sharp gradient
G) Square waves explain the need for fast transit times.
H) Square waves are easiest to generate electronically.


4) SM's devices operated well below 1Mhz, though he used VHF tubes. What gives?

Some people have expressed confusion that SM mentions a VHF tube(30-300Mhz)...

I am using 6BQ7-A tubes for the input and phase inverter because they are VHF amplifier triodes -Steven Mark

However, the measured output/input freqs on his devices were 5khz - 235khz.  Why use 300Mhz tubes then?

The answer is simple.  SM said it himself.

Vacuum tubes have EXTREAMLY FAST TRANSIT TIMES.
Solid state devices are like molasses!

Let's examine a regular transistor you'd find during the 1990s.  Why wouldn't SM use it? The oldest I could find was a 2N3904 from 1997-1999.

NPN (2N3904 from 1999)


This transistor can switch up to 300Mhz.   Not bad.    So why doesn't SM like it?    Well, as shown above, you can see the rise times and latency are pretty sad... but wow, the shut off time is just atrocious!  And this is from 1999!  Imagine what it was like in 1985-1992!     SM never needed the VHF frequency;  he was after the tube's FAST TRANSIT times, aka. low latency and fast rise and fall times.  But Of Course...Fast transit makes no sense for sine waves.  It only makes sense for square waves.

[Feynman]

@paul, all
To get back to the original topic of the post (regarding the rotational component of pulsed square waves), I found an interesting chip...

This IC produces square waves at programmable frequency... the cool part is it provides four outputs that are exactly 90 degrees shifted in phase!.   








Perhaps a good experiment would be to run three 90degree phase-shifted signals into the three control coils?  On the other hand,  I can't imagine SM was doing this with 1992 technology.  Unless of course he was using tuned delay lines.

[Feynman]

@Loner

Thanks.  As for the collector coils, who knows what we get in those!  Probably some highly nonlinear stuff.

I don't think anything special as far as controllers will be necessary. . .  the absolute freq may very well be in 555

In terms of the frequency range, even the cheapest 555s on the market today go up to 300kHz.  However, the rise/fall on a 555 can be as bad as 110-250ns, or as good as 10-15ns.  So it really depends on what brand 555 you are using.   One of the reasons I made the device shown here is because it has a rise/fall time of 2ns or better.   Furthermore, the computer control of the oscillators lets us automate data collection and save a lot of tedious switching of resistor/capacitor values
on a 555 timer.

Here is a picture of Gemini:


left: 2 x LTC6904 1khz - 67Mhz programmable oscillators
center: 2 x OPA633 high speed buffers
center bottom: 1 x Arduino Microcontroller w/ USB
right: 2 x IRF840 500V/8A high--power MOSFETs
far right: relay (not used)

Seeing some of the ideas of different materials, and noting that SM stated he couldn't mention the composition
of the Collector coils, sorta points me in that direction.  Why say that if they were copper?

This is sort of where I am stuck too... materials construction. 

[sparks]

  I posted two pictures below about coil design and collectors.  There is a question mark box.
For experimental data you could put a bucket of water there and pulse the solenoid at various freqs and measure the temp rise of the water.  Best to put some iron plate in there to catch the smoke ring.

[rhombus24]

A light bulb does not put out coherent light in any form....??

It is laser that outputs coherent light. Light source working in a laser does not have to be coherent. Laser's "reflective chamber" produces coherent light and that's why it becomes powerful and thin.

Protons are positively charged, and electrons negatively charged.

Protons are not just 'positively charged', they are lacking 1 electron. This is a different thing than some 'positive charge'.

A permanent magnet has within itself a moving electric charge, due to the availability of free electrons within the atomic structure, the structure of electron shells of certain atoms, and peculularities of molecular alignment and interaction within the overall particular magnetic substance.....?

I'm not sure this correct. If they had an electrical field they would produce an electrical potential.

Concerning the electron/magnetic field/books.... what books?

Well, I've surfed Internet for this information. In many places there were references to real books. Of course, I can't give you these references, but you may use a websearch for these keywords - you'll likely to find a relevant information.

A "lack of charge" is called neutrally charged, not positively charged. It is by definition NOT of ANY charge.....??

Neutral charge is not a "lack of charge". Neutrally-charged particle is when all protons have electrons attached to them. Proton is like a "charge hole". It is in this respect becomes a "positive charge", because it really is lacking 1 electron charge. It may have some special "positive charge" field associated with it, but I've never read about that.

An ion, by basic definition is a charged atom or molecule. Free charged particles themselves are called ionizing radiation....?? You have me really confused here. (Just being honest.)

No, ionizing radiation is EM waves of high energy that produces ions by "bombarding" atoms and molecules.

I am not trying to insult you. I truly am not, but your responses to this last post make absolutely no sense to me, from the physics standpoint. If you are trying to speak a concept, and do not have the proper words to express your concepts, please state so and I will try to interpret. I do not fault anyone for this.

In this latest discussion I'm not talking concepts. This is what I've understood and learned. The only concept I was talking is "DC acoustical waves" which frankly saying do not interfere with any other physical phenomena. It only adds a tiny bit. And it is not an aether in common sense like a gaseous substance. DC acoustical waves are virtual as much as photons are virtual particles.

Ok I have to clear some things up here before this thread goes crazy, if it hasn't already .  I feel this thread is one of the most important if not THE most important on the TPU topic.

@aleks
I first started reading your posts and thought you had no knowlege as to electronics, then you said some things that only someone with actual knowledge in the field would know.  Then you screw it up again fighting with paul who has said some of the most important things I have ever heard.  You are wrong about the laser, it does work by causing electrons to shift levels, and no a mirror and light is not a true LASER it is a focused light source, I mean cmon dude you should really think about what you say but OK.

An electron DOES NOT have a missing proton that causes it to be negativly charged.  That only happens with atoms.  Just that really makes me think how much you know about anything to do with particle physics.

@paul
Not just good but excellent insights to this.  I almost completly agree with everything you've posted on the major parts.  Like I hadn't really been thinking along the lines of a rotating magnetic field.  Now I KNOW that is the key to this device.  After this post I will go and build a nice coil setup and drivers for a rotater setup.  No collector just pure rotating field and study its effects to different things.  BTW all I have is a cold war era scope that Im borrowing from my neighbor who is a nuclear physicist.  Of course his opinion behing all this is that free energy is impossible but can you really blame any physicist for thinking this way.

BTW most of them you can't because everyone knows how hard it is to take something that you have been told is impossible for years and then just suddenly take it as fact.

So please just stop the constant arguements for who knows the most about phyics, most of us are not engineers so let's theorize and build , when we get results then we can try and figure out what is actually going on, but we cant do that becuase no one has built a wroking OU model yet..