Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Carbon Arc Spark Gap COP Calculation

Started by Doctor Whodini, February 01, 2006, 03:37:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Doctor Whodini

Elvis,

I don't agree with Magneto because I'm NOT looking at voltage or current or power, but energy. This is energy charging up a capacitor for a fixed amount of time. Energy is a different ball game than just looking at voltages or currents or power. There's MORE energy charging up a capacitor using a Carbon Arc.

I will go through this step by step at the Tesla Tech show.

Bill

Elvis Oswald

I do understand what you are showing - and you do show more energy with the spark gap.  We could assume that if the results are the same everytime and that the experiment was run 100 times... that it's pretty solid.
Any ideas on why this works this way? 

Doctor Whodini

Elvis.

I may have run the test 99 times. :-)

Actually, I ran the test suite over a dozen times for each, then averaged. I saw very little variation in the final accumulated voltage. The length of time was fixed at 15 seconds for each test. In other words, how much energy can be accumlated in a capacitor for a 15 second period. And keep in mind this is REAL energy!

This seems pretty clear to me. Running the generator with a Carbon Arc spark gap accumulated MORE energy during a 15 second period than without. Results speak for itself.

Now, the question I have is Carbon being consumed in this process? Is Carbon a fuel source? There are some that think not, and that a ZPE or active vacuum energy exchange is occurring. Until more data comes in, I would tend to agree with this explaination.

Bill

kcarrigan

Few observations. Are not Wimshurst generator's electrostatic? So that they produce DC static, not AC? Thus if your circuit uses bypass capacitors, DC does not pass through. When using a spark gap, it then produces AC and easily passes through bypass caps? Also the 'Telsa' type transformer maybe more efficient in higher HF frequencies then lower frequencies, and the spark gap, which produces more HF frequencies will transform more power( voltage) then at lower frequencies. I don't think your setup in ARC verus non ARC really addresses all the many variables which are associated with non-arc verus arc.  You may want to measure with a oscope the differences, and even use a network analyzer to see how efficient your Tesla transformer are with respect to frequency. You may find that they are most effecient at HF frequencies.

Just some comments.. Great to see experiments!
Keep rolling!
Ken

Elvis Oswald

The spark gap could produce enough wave to cause more induction in the transformer.  I think that's what magneto was driving at earlier.  The extra energy could be there in both setups... but only passes when the current is alternated by the spark gap.