How testatika can produce 3 kW running at low rpm?

[Steven Dufresne]

Mark,
Thanks for posting. Since you bring up the electroweak nuclear force and since I can't make heads nor tails of it from the reading I just did (though my reading makes me wonder if you meant the weak force since electroweak includes both electromagnetic and weak), I guess I can't say much more about your overall theory of why it works. However, I addressed a few points below...

I was going to do a post on that. I'll have to read some more about the effect. But I think what happens is
that ionized matter simply causes other free electrons to collect together in groups of like static electric charges.
It's sort of like fire, where a fire in one part of the material cause the fire in another part.  The reason I put this
COP>1 law together is that it seems as if one puts ionized matter on a "lazy susan" and rotates it around in the
environment one could always make the lazy susan somewhat larger and one would recruit even more charge.
add some antenna wires and get even more again.

I haven't done the math either but when I think of the energy interactions for the above I always get:
- use energy/do work to positively charge lazy susan
- as a result, electrons are attracted
- electrons hit antenna before they can get to lazy susan, thus avoiding neutralizing lazy susan
- but now we have this negatively charged antenna's electric field blocking the lazy susan's electric field so we need to move those electrons to somewhere else
- to move those electrons we need somewhere else to be positively charged but how did that get positively charged? Also, once the electrons get there, it'll be neutralized and we'll have to positively charge it again... more work required.

Basically I always get stuck and that's why I "suspect" that if we do the math we'll find the energy equations balance out.

This lack of a seeming one-for-one collection criteria makes
it much different from the operation of an electromagnetic generator which has very tight laws coupling input energy
and output energy. Why is collecting of ionized charges any different then the heatpump's collection of thermal
carriers?

Because a heatpump uses mechanical energy to physically move a mass which contains heat energy. There is no energy transformation between the two types of energy. It is like pumping oil out of the ground. The oil contains energy in its chemical bonds which were made by the sun's energy when the oil was plant life.

Using energy to produce an electric field can gather electrons together. But that's more like using mechanical energy to compress a spring. The potential energy in the spring is produced by the act of compressing it just as the potential energy of the electrons, their desire to mutually repel, is produced by the act of gathering them. There was no energy in the electrons to start with (assuming we're not talking about using things like the electrons spin, ...)

The above assumes that your ideas re the electroweak force don't address that. If they do then I can't say more until I understand more.

A difference between heatpumps and static electric generators is that Carnot's law inhibits the efficiency
of thermal engines, but that efficiency limitation does not bind electrostatic conversions for motor operation,
meaning self running systems are possible.

This whole process is made possible by the "electroweak nuclear force", which allow the electrons to reside
together even though their like charges should send them flying apart. The question is whether any additional
explanations are really necessary above that the charges can recruit one another and the electrons can reside
together in groups because of the electroweak force.

Now, I will say, that if one takes this tendency down to the atomic size scale it is highly suggestive that
one may be able to find a pathway by which the electroweak force causes mass to energy conversion. This
pathway may have been overlooked by researches during WWII as they "went for the gold" of reactions
involving the highly energetic strong nuclear force. So there may be some chapters yet to be written for
science's book of atomic (rather than nuclear) energy. I am not really a physics person and don't know
the math and also have my hands full with existing overunity stuff. But I really hope that you or someone
else may be able to crack this and seems like it would be a worthwhile study.

As for the macro scale this effect cannot be considered ZPE zero point energy because nature already knows
about it, as thunderstorms create ionized matter. The fix up currents of atmospheric electricity can themselves be
a source of energy. Terry Tharp in one of those videos said; "it is highly unusual but lightning seems to keep striking
my laboratory".  What does that tell you about how his high speed overunity generator operates?

The obvious answer is that something about his high speed overunity generator ionizes the air. Do you have a link to more information about his generator? Searching the net came up empty.

-Steve
http://rimstar.org

[f_dyne]

This whole process is made possible by the "electroweak nuclear force", which allow the electrons to reside
together even though their like charges should send them flying apart. The question is whether any additional
explanations are really necessary above that the charges can recruit one another and the electrons can reside
together in groups because of the electroweak force.

I'm not a physics PhD, but here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_force
I read:
"The word weak derives from the fact that the typical field strength is 10^11 times less than the strength of the electromagnetic force"

F_dyne

[mscoffman]

Well, static electricity and how it works is pretty well known, I think. Atoms in a material
are free to give up some of their electrons without the nature of the material and having to
change it's form. So a belt or a disk is caused to form a "cloud" of free electrons residing
somewhere on it's surface. That cloud can move around but it's generally static on the
surface, Any resistance acts more like a time-delay to static electricity, because the
current is vanishingly small and so cannot dissipate any energy in the resistance.

The material that is ionized positively(+) is generally mechanically pinned, and will then
begin to be neutralized again by electrons being transported into the area by nature.

The "electroweak force" from what I understand arbitrates the ability of electrons to form
a group cloud in the first place, because the electrical charge on each electron should force
all electrons to avoid one another and fly off into space. They call it the electroweak force
because it used to be that these electro + weak forces were considered separate but
they were united by experiments with a particle accelerator. The same thing happens
in the nucleus of an atom where positively charged protons all reside packed together
in a very small space. They too want to all fly apart, what holds them together is the
"strong nuclear force". Breaking the strong force is what suplies the energy in normal
nuclear reactions.

Once you already have a whole bunch of electrons clustered together they form an
electrical field which has a voltage - that causes additional matter to become
ionized and to collect even more free electrons in the cloud.  Obviously the belt or disk
takes some energy to move in the environment especially when there is static electric
cloud attached to it's surface. But I think the electrodynamic potential energy of the
electrons being collected exceeds the energy being used to move the belt or disk.
<- That is overunity energy - but there is a cost and that is that the environment
doesn't want ionized matter around and therfore step in to neutralize it . But then as
a result nature has to expend it's internal energy flows to balance what you took out
- and that is not ZPE. It is not like getting energy from a magnet and then nothing
happens ->that is ZPE.

Once you've got the electrons collected, you can either use them to collect more
electrons  or else convert them into electrodynamic current to do work. It's hard
to convert them in electrodynamic current efficiently enough to build a self running
machine, but it can be done.

So what I hope you are seeing is that I think static electric machines are inheriently
overunity because there is more energy available in the electrons then it took to
collect them. To some extent because what it takes to dissipate them doesn't
operate fast enough in nature to cancel the collection. So that allows the charge to recycled
and reused creating even more charge. You don't have to do anything to produce them
as they are alread overunity...But, you do have to convert that static electrcity
to electrodynamic current efficiently in the end, cause if you don't you won't have
enough overunity energy to run a self running machine.  And you then won't notice
that it is already an inheriently overunity process in the static electric collection
process in the first place. There are not "gobbs" more energy in the electrons then
was used to collect them first place - just "some" more.

I hope you can see that a self running static electric machine is like the freon (actually
methylchloride) based  "dipping bird" which gets it's energy from nature's maintenance of
a low humidity atmosphere in a world where water is present. Self running static electric
machines get their energy from nature's maintenance of non-ionized matter in a world if
you do the right thing you can ionize matter and collect the electrons in a way that the
process self repeats at a low energy cost. A heat pump gets it's energy from nature's
maintenance of thermal equilibriumn a world if you do the right thing you can collect
thermalized matter... A heat pump cannot form a self running system because of
efficiency limitations built into heat engine process by Carnot law. So self running static
electric machines should not be too suprising. The "dipping bird" already self runs.

The above are all very different (hence the COP>1 terminology) from getting energy from
a ZPE process were nature supposedly is not affected at all and the outcome energy is
extra in the universe.

a) Fuel process energy - requires a quantity of fuel , doesn't violate CoE
b) COP>1 processes energy - requires that natural systems eventually come up with
            the energy difference, doesn't violate CoE
c) ZPE process energy - quantum processes evolve energy and the energy is extra in
            nature, does violate CoE

Only (c) of the above can compete with (a) under all circumstances. (b) can be inherently
valuable but there is a cost paid by the environment that may or may not be acceptable
if billion of humans try doing the process all at once. So this means that prohibitions
against perpetual motion machines are not really correct statements, they are obsoleted
by understanding the above table.

Now..If you take the self running static electric machine and you begin to reduce it's
size That's where you may begin to observe "electroweak" mater to energy conversion.
It doesn't power the static electric COP>1 overunity machines, but it makes use of the
same principles. Also if you think there is ZPE actually occuring in static electric
processes it's going to very difficult to experimentally validate it as natural processes are
going to keep trying to hide it.


:S:MarkSCoffman

[Steven Dufresne]

Once you already have a whole bunch of electrons clustered together they form an
electrical field which has a voltage - that causes additional matter to become
ionized and to collect even more free electrons in the cloud.  Obviously the belt or disk
takes some energy to move in the environment especially when there is static electric
cloud attached to it's surface. But I think the electrodynamic potential energy of the
electrons being collected exceeds the energy being used to move the belt or disk.
<- That is overunity energy - but there is a cost and that is that the environment
doesn't want ionized matter around and therfore step in to neutralize it . But then as
a result nature has to expend it's internal energy flows to balance what you took out

I guess that's the whole question then. Only experiment will tell for sure. Though I disagree, the experiment I illustrated above would take advantage of it, even though I'm hoping for ZPE tapping in amongst the meshes. Experiment will tell, experiment is king. I may have seen support already for one or both approaches. The small Van de Graaff machine I use, shown in the above photo, on it's own produces puny, thin, harmless sparks. In the configuration in the photo I once discharged it using thumb and finger of one hand after around 10 seconds of running and got a shock that strongly ran right up my arm to my shoulder. I use a discharge rod now :-). If I allow sparks around the disk area, really from the copper plate capacitors on the backplate and through the disk wires, they are loud and thick. In fact, I'm guessing I had a little UV damage to one eye around two months back as a result - now healed. I use welding goggles now :-). In all my years working with HV and with much more powerful power supplies producing sparks, I have never before had an eye injury, assuming that was the cause. However, the difference in spark strength may just be because there is extra capacitance for the Van de Graaff machine to use. I'm still plugging away.

<snip>
The above are all very different (hence the COP>1 terminology) from getting energy from
a ZPE process were nature supposedly is not affected at all and the outcome energy is
extra in the universe.

a) Fuel process energy - requires a quantity of fuel , doesn't violate CoE
b) COP>1 processes energy - requires that natural systems eventually come up with
            the energy difference, doesn't violate CoE
c) ZPE process energy - quantum processes evolve energy and the energy is extra in
            nature, does violate CoE

Only (c) of the above can compete with (a) under all circumstances. (b) can be inherently
valuable but there is a cost paid by the environment that may or may not be acceptable
if billion of humans try doing the process all at once. So this means that prohibitions
against perpetual motion machines are not really correct statements, they are obsoleted
by understanding the above table.

Put another way, (a) is powered from the sun (fossil fuels, biofuels), (b) is the electroweak force (?) which get's energy from where (ZPE?), (c) depends on the physics model you use. In standard quantum theory I don't know the source of the energy of the virtual particles, whereas in the wave structure of matter (WSM) model it's waves emitted by all particles in the universe but I think that energy is abundant enough and replenished fast enough that the only effect I can see would be temporary power failures and gravitational effects - may require new types of appliances. Support for your approach, (b), may be that there is nothing in the testatika visitor reports about secondary effects though the conditions may just not have been right (no cars around at the time to stall.)

UPDATE: I did plenty of work on it this week but it takes time to get the spacing and material right. So far I have sparking in between the layers when I want corona.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org

[Shanti]

Well, as someone else has already written this in another Testatika thread I will just mention it again, as I came also upon this idea quite some time ago and verified it.

I was discussing with someone, if the Testatika is an electrostatic induction base machine, like e.g. a Wimshurst. I said, it can't be, for a simple reason: The grilles they use would be a death blow for an electrostatic induction machine, as you would usually really prevent as much as you can any corona discharges. And how the Testatika is made would really not prevent but provoke corona discharges. And then the idea came, they want to have corona discharges, this is how this thing works (well at least the rotary part of it).
the principle is simple. If you have an electric field near a conductor (e.g. from a electret or another charged but insulated conductor), then current would flow inside this conductor until the electric field in the conductor would be everywhere 0. But as we know, the electrons will not be evenly distributed in the conductor, especially if there are sharp edges. There, much more electrons will gather, and the local electron density in the conductor will be much higher. Due this, at this point a corona discharge will happen. This means, electrons will fly into the air. This now means, the conductor has not eneough electrons anymore to have an E-Field of 0, So new current will flow in the conductor (electrons will be sucked into the conductor). And then the conductor will again have some corona discharge, ...
Sure, the problem is, that the air there would become more and more charged, and therefore it will not work anymore very good. Therefore you either move the conductor or the air, so that there can be some air exchange. It will work also without this special movement as the movement due to the temperature of the air will carry away some charge, but this will not be very efficient.
So all in all what this does, is, the movement of the air will do the work, to let the current flow (so the air will cool). But due to this principle you cannot get much power out of it. In the test experiment I made, which was about a grille with the size of half a hand, I could just produce enough power to light up a little lamp every few seconds. So, while this is surely maybe a nice toy, to demonstarte someone what FE is, it is completely useless for real power generation.
But I think, as is also indicated in the Testatika movie, that the rotary equipment is not used for the generation of the power. It is just a simple self running HV Generator (But surely not as much HV as a normal electrostatic induction machine).
This HV is then IMHO used to generate the power in the pots. How these work, can only be speculated. I think similar to the Gray tube. And I think the gray tube works like a farnsworth electron multiplier, but which also makes use of the geiger-counter principle of an electron cascade effect.
BTW: Just for the really few, who don't know. The magnets and the second rotor are not really needed. The first machines, didn't have them but worked also. They are just there for improvement, but not needed for the basic principle.

And IMHO Paul Potter's schematic is not right (but that's just my opinion). As Marinov simply explained what's in the pots. And there you recognize, that Baumann made an actually improved design of the gray tube, by using a coil with a few turns as the anode instead of the bar in the gray tube. As Farnsworth also mentioned some design similar to that as improvement in his patent(s).