Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

[duff]

That will work. Although just one MUR1560 should suffice, no?  The reverse breakdown, Vr, of the MUR1560 is 600V. One will have less losses then two in-series.

PL

Paul & Poynt,

Thanks for the input -

The original test was with a 1N4007


I had one FEP16JT -

Max Repetitive Reverse Voltage: 600V
Max RMS Voltage: 420V
Max Reverse Recovery Time: 50ns

Again I struck the copper plate 30 times.
Average Voltage: 105.63V
Max Voltage: 146V

Note: I never saw spikes greater than 350V when testing the commutator.


-Duff

Edit: The capacitor I'm using is a non-polarized 0.85uF 2300VAC

[hakware]

It's been what, over a week, I've asked him at least 3 times, with no response on his part. He could use a capacitance meter, or the simple RC time constant method I described that included all of the required info to do this including the link to a RC time constant calculator.

Also, as stated, there's very little point in anyone replicating this until NRG can at least show some sincerity because this experiment has been performed countless times in college labs, at home, etc., Stefan. As stated, either NRG got ***extremely**** lucky in the way he wound the coil, or it's a ... you know what. Besides, someone in this thread already replicated NRG's experiment. This person clearly says and shows in his video that it's well under 100% efficiency. Hmmm, now that I think of it, everyone in this thread ignored that persons video. Why? He did great work!  Here's the link -->

http://www.energetictube.com/play/Vacuum_Radiant_Energy/NRG%20From%20The%20Vacuum%20replication%20test

The question is, why is NRG arguing, and taunting people with a working model of everyone's dream here, and not doing the minimum experiments. This is the same behavior that happens at these forums time after time after time. IMO legit people are beginning to get it. If someone is dodgy, gets upset or ignores you when they're asked to do a simple test that could easily reveal the truth, etc. etc. then move on and not let these people destroy this alternative energy community. They've wasted enough energy. Again, it's pointless for anyone to replicate it until they can at least do the minimum experiments.

Legit people may want to wonder why these same people that make these videos, a new username, always have theories that are so out of this world, while they ignore or throw rocks at methods of capturing common ambient thermal energy. Isn't that odd?  I've shown two completely different methods of using the best available mathematics from conventional physics that ambient thermal energy is available energy in massive endless quantities: 1. Diodes. 2. Magnetic. I mean, you would think that at least a few people out of countless researchers here would see, "Gee, atoms at room temperature are continuously moving around at thousands of mph. Gee, the Sun continually sustains such energy. Gee, there are countless macro scale effects that show such energy is easily affected and transferable on a macro scale, such as thermal conductivity and gas compression and expansion. Any one who's taken Physics 101 will know that when you expand gas that you are actually *removing* energy from the vibrating gas particles!  Obviously when you complete the cycle by compressing the gas back to normal you give the energy back to the gas. The tricks is make the cycle unbalanced. Perhaps viscosity?  You see, IMO those are the type of thoughts intelligent researchers in this field should be pondering upon. But hey, by all means,  people continue on because you no longer need to ponder upon such thoughts because I've provided the major breakthroughs, the methods, and the mathematics using well-established conventional software, FEMM. I'm mean, heck, you would people want to spend a few days verifying my claim and start working on research that is backed by the mathematics of conventional physics that is an almost 100% guarantee to be the biggest breakthrough in all history!

PL

Just one note In his video, he uses a Non polarized AC capacitor, which most of them I see have internal resistance compared to NRG's capacitor which appears to be a paper style capacitor more suited to RF where its internal resistances are much lower.

[PaulLowrance]

Duff, are you saying the diode method did not charge the cap as high as the metal plate method? It's possible the AC voltage is going well over the diodes Vr, perhaps due to resonance from the cap and coil. A scope could check for this. I wonder what the max current is with the metal plate method. If it's very high, then the diode losses could be significant.

PL

[PaulLowrance]

@Jesus

I tried putting one diode as you show at the negative terminal of the battery but that did not seem to produce charging.

I thought you put the diode in-series with the high voltage cap. That makes a huge difference. So it seems we're talking about two entirely different circuits.

PL

[duff]

Duff, are you saying the diode method did not charge the cap as high as the metal plate method?

No, the diode method did not charge the cap as high as NRG's circuit.

It's possible the AC voltage is going well over the diodes Vr, perhaps due to resonance from the cap and coil. A scope could check for this. I wonder what the max current is with the metal plate method. If it's very high, then the diode losses could be significant.

It possible but I not think so. The 1n4007 has a Vr of 1000V though it not that fast. The FEP16JT certainly has it covered on speed. Also, the FEP16JT has a current rating of 16A.

As stated previously I never saw spikes over 350V when using the commutator. I could get a scope shot but I really don't think it's worth the trouble being I don't have a storage scope.

At the moment I'm concentrating my efforts on another commutator and different brushes.

Quote from: duff on March 13, 2009, 10:49:49
@Jesus

I tried putting one diode as you show at the negative terminal of the battery but that did not seem to produce charging.

I thought you put the diode in-series with the high voltage cap. That makes a huge difference. So it seems we're talking about two entirely different circuits.

PL

Yes, a different circuit.  This was related to the commutator circuit.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6734.msg163330#msg163330


-Duff