Joule Thief

[Koen1]

i'm still trying to figure out if koen is suggesting the electron is a discrete particle...

Hehehe I like that

To be honest, I don't really think it is. But I don't mind suggesting it, if that amuses you.

I personally think the view of the electron as a cloud of virtual photons is more logical, but
I am inclined to believe that is still not exactly how it works. I am inclined to believe the
electron is in fact a quasi-coherent virtual photon structure, and perhaps we need to go deeper
still and label it a quasi-coherent virtual sub-photon structure.

Not that that really has anything to do with the stuff I posted earlier, those are simply definitions
straight out of the books.
Now I don't like to use Wiki as reference because it so often contains serious flaws, but on these
definitions Wiki appears to give the same explanations as the books I have (read):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb

One coulomb is the amount of electric charge transported in one second by a steady current of one ampere.

and

The electrical charge of one mole of electrons (approximately 6.022 × 1023 electrons, or Avogadro's number) is known as a faraday (actually â€"1 faraday, since electrons are negatively charged). One faraday equals 96485.3399 coulombs (the Faraday constant). In terms of Avogadro's number (NA), one coulomb is equal to approximately 1.036 × NA  × 10âˆ'5 elementary charges.

And there it seems I shot myself in the foot eh
I used a wrong definition. I said before that 1 Coulomb is one mole of electrons. It is not, 1 Faraday is 1 mole of electrons,
and 1 Coulomb is approximately 1/96500th of a Faraday, therefore 1/96500th of a mole of electrons.

Nevertheless, it is this definition itself that suggests that a Faraday, and with it also a Coulomb, consists of a definite number of electrons.
Whether these electrons are indeed discrete particles or not, the definition of the Coulomb appears to view them as such,
and since this is directly related to calculating the Farad value of capacitors and the Amperage of currents,
it would seem that all these formulae do assume them to be discrete particles indeed.

So the matter is not so much do I believe they are discrete particles,
the matter is that by dfinition they are assumed to be, in electrical theory.
If you have a model in which they can be handled as indiscrete particles,
then I would really like to hear what your new definitions are of Amperage, Coulombs, Farads, etc.


Regards,
Koen

[Mk1]

@koen

I really don't see your point, but mine is if you can generate higher voltage it can be used with more electronics everyday
the logic chips usually work well from 5 to 9 v , now if you can run them from dead battery , you can also easily find 1.5 volt substitute to it , home made battery . The battery i use is now .7 volt and it still charges cap , but please tell me did you try to build it to see its potential or are you just saying those thing for argument sake .

Mark

If you are not a builder , i doubt that you are wasting your time , making points while others make discoveries and get results , not ee book crap .

[Koen1]

@Koen,
What is a light chaser? If you click on the TinyWeenyVideo under the postage stamp icon, then it should popup.

Thanks Jim   So that's what you meant by "chaser". I have heard such a thing called "running light". Either name seems equally silly,
but at least I now know what you meant.

I want to incorporate the "principle" of the LED chaser, to charge up 8 CAPs, in turn, then use the 9th LED "HI" or (+) to fire all Mosfets at once, so all 8 caps dump their current together into a load.

Yes, nice idea I'm still looking at it, have to think it over at leasure... Think it may be a very usefull setup...

I am not going to stick my finger in it to find out if it works, I'll bridge the output with a 5amp fuse instead.

Aw, here I thought we were going for the old "burn your finger, join the club" routine lol
(those who visited the carbon rod thread know what I'm talking about, those who didn't, well, it's more joking sillyness)
Yeah, better not finger 5 amps, those grunts bite!

The circuit will take a fair bit of work to figure out, but not too difficult, but any maths, you can do ha ha, I'm dum at maths.

LOL

To be very honest, I am more of a conceptual guy myself. I only do the maths because well, if you don't do it yourself, nobody else will
do it for you either, and if you want some exact figures you'd better go figure. LOL Oh my I'm getting really silly now... Better log off soon I guess
But really, there must be people around that are actual math whizzes and can work stuff like this out in a jippy.

Regards,
Koen

[Koen1]

@koen

I really don't see your point, but mine is if you can generate higher voltage it can be used with more electronics everyday

Yes, I got that point of yours, I just don't see what's so spectacular about it.

the logic chips usually work well from 5 to 9 v , now if you can run them from dead battery , you can also easily find 1.5 volt substitute to it , home made battery .

Yes, that is indeed the nice thing of JT-style setups, you can increase output voltage from a 1.5V battery. Still think you'll also increase amp draw on the battery if you pull a constant DC output at higher volts, but I won't press that point as it appears to lack consensus and don't really want to get into arguments here.

The battery i use is now .7 volt and it still charges cap , but please tell me did you try to build it to see its potential or are you just saying those thing for argument sake .

Did I try to build what? You act like I am commenting on a specific circuit that you built... I don't even know what exactly you are talking about.
As far as I know you are still talking about your multiple pickup coil toroids... And since I got quite confused trying to get a clear picture of that, and we nearly had a little fallout on the subject of there being any power gain since I misunderstood you and thought that was what you said, I actually dropped your MK coils entirely. It was just too confusing, what with reports of excessive voltage gain one the one hand, accounts that seemed to state actual power gain on another, and dismissal of power gain from a third angle... And then IST jumping in, whose hyperenthousiastic posts very often appear to claim OU but never show it... So yeah, I quit trying to follow exactly
what you are doing. What I make of it is that you are aiming for high voltages for reasons unknown, and I still don't know how much actual power you are getting out...

My recent posts on capacitors and Farad values are, in case you are interested, related directly to my ideas for a circuit. I was pondering the circuit and the
Farads I would need, when this admittedly much less specific and more fundamental issue made me wonder if this was the best way to go, energy-wise.
So that's why I brought this up, and with the varied public in this thread there is a fair chance of a few nice and possibly enlightening answers or replies.
Yes, I do build, but I do think about what I build long and hard before I start building. I know some people do it the other way around. If that works for them,
then they must do that. This works for me, and is also a lot chaper than building a lot and finding out that half of it was useless.

If you are not a builder , i doubt that you are wasting your time , making points while others make discoveries and get results , not ee book crap .

Excuse me?  Do you mean to say:

If you are not a builder , and i doubt that you are,  then you are wasting your time with ee book crap and making points,  while others make discoveries and get results.

If that is what you mean, then I am not at all amused.
Here I am trying to get the picture clearer in a civil manner, and there you go insinuating I parrot e-book talk?
What's worse, claiming you are making discoveries and getting results, while you've really only been posting more of the same
for weeks now, that you're getting high voltages. What amazing progress and grand discoveries, that you are still getting high
voltage from a transformer... What grand discoveries did you make then? What, besides the higher voltages, are you getting?
Please don't act like you are the pioneer who is very busy doing important discoveries and I am an idiot. That is not nice.
If you are such a great pioneer and have made such impressive discoveries, perhaps you can clearly explain what they are then,
before you start making negative ans accusing remarks about others?

Regards,
Koen

P.S. If anyone else is as annoyed with me trying to get some things straight as MK appears to be,
please say so... and I'll try to keep out of your thread.






[/quote]

[jeanna]

Hi Koen,
I think the reason folks use the volts numbers for their capacitor descriptions is that the meters we own measure volts not Farade. So, they do work together and the volts measure does indicate the farads measure, somehow.
Don't ask me to do it, please, cuz I couldn't.

@all the scope helpers,

Thank you for all your suggestions. I am now armed with the right questions to ask the velleman help desk.

I will study the manual to find out how to make the screen keep the DC option so I can use it. (or ask them)

I will ask them how they propose I should set a zero reference. (using the clip that is shown in the picture but is never even mentioned in words in the manual.)

stuff like that. Thank you all ,

jeanna