Joule Thief

[innovation_station]

GARY A MOST WONDERFUL POST ....




WE MUST REAMIN A CHILD AT PLAY TO REDISCOVER THE TRUTH

LOVE HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE ONLY WAY    BUT HUMANS HAD TO DISCOVER HATE ...

HENCE THE REASON FOR BOTH LOVE AND HATE

SO YOU CAN DISCOVER YOUR INNER SELF AND MOST WONT BE ABLE TO UNLESS WE LIVED IN A WORLD OF HARD TIMES ... AND EXPERIENCED LOVE AND HATE ONLY TO THEN CHOOSE THE CORRECT PATH OF LIFE ...

THIS EARTH IS A FAR MORE MISTRYIOUS PLACE THAN  WHAT SO FEW REALIZE .... 

IST!

NICE TIP TOO CAP 

[jeanna]

Hi everybody,

Please excuse the interruption in this philosophical discussion...

I just timed the fluoro tube today at 5 hr. 15 minutes on one AA battery.
This confirms it. The 15 watt lasts longer than the 7 watt tube. (easier to light in the first place too.)

Throw all of it out the window and start over!!

I also posted a new type of drawing on the 2 tier circuit. (next door)
As promised, this is an attempt to draw it in the way
Tesla drew his parallel AC circuits.
I believe this and a development of this kind of drawing might be necessary.

The other (more conventional) kind of circuit drawing might be impossibly dense and difficult to understand when dealing with these kinds of multiple levels of parallel loads and wires.

Please have a look.


jeanna

[Pirate88179]

Jeanna:

I am not surprised one bit by your findings as they match what I have seen.  At first, it appears counter-intuitive but, after thinking about Gadget's explanation of how we are lighting the tubes without the filament, it makes sense.  So see...bigger is better...and easier too. 

I wonder how many folks tried lighting a 4 watt and failed and never tried to light something larger? 

Do they make 80" tubes?

Bill

[jeanna]

...Gadget's explanation of how we are lighting the tubes without the filament, it makes sense.  So see...bigger is better...and easier too. 

I wonder how many folks tried lighting a 4 watt and failed and never tried to light something larger? 

yes, good thought. Maybe even jose Pino could have lit one.

So, Bill, did you get your 48 inchers this year? I do hope these easy starters are not a thing of the past.

Speaking of gadget...
He made an addition to a circuit of his after or I could say within the secondary and managed to achieve 1300 volts.

He is a radio guy with a lot of intuition.
I have noticed that the radio guys have a sense about these things that cannot really be drawn. I am trying to make a usable drawing, based on Tesla's drawings for this kind of divergence from the normal dc closed circuit.

I think closed and open are part of it too.The ac drawn with nested parallel circuits within the main one is a kind of open, because it doesn't ever have to end. It is not going to end in the battery because it is going the other way. Of course Tesla did say they could just touch the floor or wall to be grounded.

See if you can make any sense out of my drawing next door. Please think of it as nested parallel circuits. then comment and I will see if I can make it more clear.

BTW where is gadget?
Hey gadget, are you there? You could make a sensible comment on that drawing too. Maybe it can help with the kind of addons you do as well?

thank you,

jeanna

[TheNOP]

IN reality   there are no laws ............just  commonly  held  theorys .
Your  wording was very careful
You said "t does not mean the laws are not how things tends to behave."
Tends to behave ........ so you know that the laws are not really laws  if they just describe  a tendency  to behave  in a particular way . If  a law was actually a law there would be no tendancy .........there would only  be  obedience of the law.
But nature is not like that ......... There is ALWAYS an exception.
It is the exceptions that we seek

you don't get it, at least you are not seeing them as you should be.

physic's laws apply to specific things.
do you know to what and when they apply ?

yes, there are always exceptions.
do you know them and why they are exceptions ?
do not think those exceptions are not known, they are.
laws are what they are because their limits are known.

here you are assuming that there is a desire  within the  scientific comunity to get the facts out .
The  main desire within  the scientific comunity  is the same  desire as in any other profession .......to  maintain  their  jobs ........and maybe  move up .
It has nothing to do with honesty .......it has nothing to do with integrety .
A scientist  that   turns in a report  that runs counter to  the agenda of the  company will soon be unemployed  .
You  can not know   if a study  can be trusted untill you know  who paid for the study .
WHen I was  young they used to tell who  did the study ........now .........   a  " scientific  study "  is  gospel ......it is  true   because it is  a scientific  study .
I have heard  of thoiusands of  studies being  quoted on the news in the last  few years .....NONE of them stated the source .           We are lead to blindly  believe any  study  put  before us .

i am assuming nothing about scientists behaviors.

those biased studies are verified facts now ?
that is what they want you to think.
they will eventualy loose their jobs anyway if the results are falsified.
a compagny can't build anything based on lies and ommitions
those publications are not even done by scientists.
they are marketing tactic, not the whole truth.
the only thing they can do is trying to sell thier actual product(s) with those tactics.

can i point to you that what you are saying about "desires" apply to about everyone on our planet,
i was specificaly thinking to some who are claiming OU on this forum as as i wrote "everyone".

yes

the  truth is hidden in plain sight .
There is no one   more blind  than  a blind man that thinks he has  "the sight "
People are actively  taught that  OU is  impossible .......along with   all the other  facts that they are taught .
Because  it was taught  along with all the other facts   it is taken  as  true ......

The  best way to hide  a lie is in the middle  of  alot of truth .
Most of what  you  have been taught is true ....... but some of what you  were taught  was manufactured to  prevent  people  from  finding OU .

i do not agree with you on this.
hidding things in plain sight never last very long before someone notice it.

where  did you  get that  definition  of OU?

somewhere in this jt tread.
i quoted it as it is not what i think it is.
everyone have it own idea on what OU is.

All your " laws "  say that  OU is impossible ........  your laws state that there is no perpetual motion ...........yet  the universe   still exists  in spite of your laws
The electrons  continue  to spin endlessly  and  effortlessly  around the outer shells of ALL the atoms .   
All that exists is in a state  of perpetual motion . ........even life itself   

this is where you got it wrong.
what is saying that they are spinning endlessly and will be doing so eternaly ?

the laws you are refering too state that you can't have more energy in a system then then what is putted in.
being you or an external factor(s), in whatever energy form, that is/are inputing the energy does not matter.
they simply add up.
that laws does not even remotly talk about the imposibilities of having perpetual(long lasting) motion.
that myth about the imposibilities of perpetual motion base on this laws are actually propagated by peoples uneducated in the field.


to me nothing is perpetual, everythings will eventualy change.
at least that is what i see of what is surrounding me.


this will be my last post on this subject.
i am saying this so you don't think i am starting to ignore your posts.
i think we can agree that we disagree on this subject.