Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[forest]

You think too much    It's not about parametric resonance it's about Newton law    What is the first Newton law ?

If you can make an experiment with a ball , but it has to be measured. First measure how far you can push a ball on a flat table with a applied force. Then make a good pendulum with very low resistance to the arm movement and attach the ball there. Use the same force to push ball and measure exactly the road ball will pass during oscillations (even if period is changing) - NO, not the average road but the total one.

Isn't that all about resistance and Newton first law ?

[Zeitmaschine]

Then impedance is proportional to the frequency.

Interesting!

So let's play around with this idea: There is a magic transformer. The iron core of this transformer can change the frequency on its way from the primary to the secondary coil. Input is 50Hz and output is 500Hz (or vice versa). What would happen?

Yes, the difference between the two types of pendulums is small for small angles, but for the sake of comparison to the LC circuits it is better to compare them to rotary pendulums.  It's just cleaner this way.

Will save this for later. Maybe for the clean drawing of a working OU generator.

mass in the pendullum is equivalent to inductance in LC circuit... please find equivalents for voltage, tension, capacitance, current.

Could be Kapanadze (and Stepanov and Marks) succeeded with there OU devices just because they had no idea about such things. As a matter of fact since the textbooks deny the existence of free energy, there is no use in trying to build a free energy device according to the textbooks.

switching capacitors/inductors by MOSFETs (because they are the fastest transistors and have much lower on-resistance than thyristors and others).

Why fast transistors when the frequency is just a few hundred Hertz and why low on-resistance when energy is generated in abundance?

I am not sure Kapanadze has accomplished anything special because those 3 points have not been resolved.

To the best of my knowledge the TK investigation team has resolved these 3 points (but unfortunately not documented it sufficiently on video).

In theory changing the capacitance or inductance does not result in gain of energy (only change of voltage and current).
So both of these methods do not give free energy according to current theory.

Then either the current theory is wrong or the equations in this patent are wrong, because it states clearly otherwise. By simply switching the inductance of an LC circuit the voltage across the capacitor quadruples just after one complete cycle (see diagram below).

And as a side note: The 4 strange connected diodes seen in the TK video next to the transformer are not just by chance the voltage limiter diodes VD1 to VD4?

Furthermore I'm still puzzled why the right-hand coil of the transformer looks as if someone might have tampered with it. What was wrong with that coil so TK had to remove and to reattach the insulation foil troublesome? The inductance perhaps?

And to add one more »maybe«: Maybe some readers know already the solution but they left quietly this forum ...

[verpies]

Actually there is nothing about resistance in Newton's 1^st law. This law only describes motion of mass in the absence of any force.
In vacuum, on an ideally flat and hard horizontal table a smooth, hard ball will travel infinitely far when any force is applied to it.

[verpies]

So let's play around with this idea: There is a magic transformer. The iron core of this transformer can change the frequency on its way from the primary to the secondary coil. Input is 50Hz and output is 500Hz (or vice versa). What would happen?

That's not a fully defined question, thus it is hard for me to answer it.
If you ask about the power dissipated in a resistive load connected to the secondary of this transformer, then my answer would be that it would not change between 50Hz and 500Hz, but I am not sure if this is what you were asking.

Could be Kapanadze (and Stepanov and Marks) succeeded with there OU devices just because they had no idea about such things.

Ignorance can be bliss in some cases. Theories can be erroneous or misapplied. Also, it is a great service to science if experimental proof is found that invalidates some "law".

As a matter of fact since the textbooks deny the existence of free energy, there is no use in trying to build a free energy device according to the textbooks.

Yes. Also, current textbooks deny the creation of energy from nothing but they do not deny the conversion of energy (e.g. nuclear to electric).

Why fast transistors when the frequency is just a few hundred Hertz

Because the less time the switches spend between the "on" and "off" state, the less energy is wasted in that transition and less heat is generated.

and why low on-resistance when energy is generated in abundance?

If the energy is generated in abundance indeed then the loss of efficiency does not matter, but the heat still can be a problem, as it can lead to the destruction of the silicon switch.
Also, thyristors are incapable of interrupting current or conducting current in both directions. MOSFETs are not limited that way.
Next, Thyristors are less rugged than MOSFETs and are harder to bias (use), their gate is easier to damage and they are prone to 3rd quadrant turn-on during fast transients. Finaly MOSFET's and IGBTs are generally cheaper due to the economy of scale (more popular).

The only thing that thyristors have that MOSFETs or IGBTs do not is the latch-up effect that can be a blessing or a curse depending on application.

To the best of my knowledge the TK investigation team has resolved these 3 points (but unfortunately not documented it sufficiently on video).

Unfortunately those two eventualities are synonymous to us observers.

Then either the current theory is wrong or the equations in this patent are wrong, because it states clearly otherwise. By simply switching the inductance of an LC circuit the voltage across the capacitor quadruples just after one complete cycle (see diagram below).

Yes, both cannot be true.
The increase of the voltage in a capacitor does not impress me at all because voltage is not energy (neither is current nor frequency).
However the increase of voltage across a constant capacitance over an integer number of cycles, impresses me very much because E=0.5*C*V²

If I saw something like the attached LC circuit's I&V waveforms on my scope (starting and ending with zero current, yet starting with some voltage and ending up with 4x higher voltage across the same capacitance) while the LC circuit was isolated from an external power supply during this whole measurement period, than this would be an undeniable evidence of 1600% OU for me and I would go and make some children immediately.

And as a side note: The 4 strange connected diodes seen in the TK video next to the transformer are not just by chance the voltage limiter diodes VD1 to VD4?
Furthermore I'm still puzzled why the right-hand coil of the transformer looks as if someone might have tampered with it. What was wrong with that coil so TK had to remove and to reattach the insulation foil troublesome? The inductance perhaps?

I don't keep track of the construction details of TK's devices thus I cannot even speculate about those diodes.

I am still puzzled why people are preoccupied with the unverified TK's devices and the working Yoke device is not given any attention despite much more concrete information being available about it (e.g. scopeshots and better power measurements)

[Zeitmaschine]

I am still puzzled why people are preoccupied with the unverified TK's devices and the working Yoke device is not given any attention despite much more concrete information being available about it (e.g. scopeshots and better power measurements)

Maybe because it has not made it to (German) TV yet. Or has it?