Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[TEKTRON]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckt7GRGIjyM 

[Ceceron3]

ПривеÑ,сÑ,вую! Не коÑ,орые уÑ,верждали, чÑ,о лампы включены как гирлянды.... То эÑ,о заблуждение. Там 5 ламп по 1 кÐ'Ñ, и подключены паралелно. И прижаÑ,Ñ‹ к посÑ,ели, чÑ,о бы провода не соскальзывали на пол. С уважением Александр.

[ronotte]

@microcontroller,

all very interesting. Thanks.
Anyway Iron has the greatest nuclear binding energy so it seems very, very difficult to stimulate it to emits anything unless subjected to very high energies like that in particle accelerators .

Please read the following:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html

The iron limit:
The buildup of heavier elements in the nuclear fusion processes in stars is limited to elements below iron, since the fusion of iron would subtract energy rather than provide it. Iron-56 is abundant in stellar processes, and with a binding energy per nucleon of 8.8 MeV (look at the diagram), it is the third most tightly bound of the nuclides. Its average binding energy per nucleon is exceeded only by 58Fe and 62Ni, the nickel isotope being the most tightly bound of the nuclides.

Also:

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/961/why-is-the-nucleus-of-an-iron-atom-so-stable

Lighter nuclei liberate energy when undergoing fusion, heavier nuclei when undergoing fission. What is it about the nucleus of an Iron atom that makes it so stable? Alternatively: Iron has the greatest nuclear binding energy .

I worked for almost 20 years in atomic research center and never had the opportunity to measure activity from any standard iron manufact. So it seems difficult that SM or any other succeeded into doing any' house room' nuclear transmutation.

You would make me happy to read any supporting doc you could have as in the past years I did an enormous work trying to duplicate the SM TPU device as it is possible to see in Overunity Forum.
Thanks

Roberto

[aether22]

I was just thinking how I might do an experiment, create an LC tank circuit and inductively couple to it and pull power from it.


But I realized that the act of pulling power from it will lower the impedance of the coil killing the resonance, so it would need to be tuned allowing for a given draw of power, more or less would kill the resonance and I assume the power.


This makes sense of various things in the Kapanadze patent and it also neatly dove-tales with an observation Stefan made, that when there is less load the spark gap fires more often, and when it draws more power it fires less often.


Why would you draw more power than you can use so you must waste it?
Because drawing less kills the effect?


BTW my guess is that the following could work:


Based on SR and many other FE devices and a rather interesting account here: [size=78%]https://www.goldenplanetforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=22[/size] (the second one, the first is evidence of an aether vortex though, Hamel like)
This result indicates that flux fields can be projected, similar claims by Boyd Bushman. (and unusual experiments with antennas and reception)


You have an electromagnet (open ferrite core) pulsing at a given low frequency, this circuit is charged negatively to a high voltage.


You have a tank circuit on an air core, this circuit is the same as the main tank circuit used by Wesley, this is charged positively to a high voltage that discharges to the negative circuit when the voltages raises too high.


And then a pickup coil pulls it off the tank circuit.


The only differences between the current circuit that Wesley has and this is:
1: This frequency would be probably lower than the flyback frequency.
2: A coil (and some source of power) must be added after D2 (the negative side).
3: The spark gap need not fire through the caduceus potentially, Romero's didn't and he got the trumpet.


The flux transfer from the electromagnet to the air core tank coil is increased unidirectionaly, because the pickup coil has low impedance due to the air core a lot of power must flow through it to cancel the field pulled in from the ferrite, this results in significant energy gain.


To put it another way, Tesla made his coils to pump aether, well they do, out of the negative and into the positive. (and out with the expansion of a magnetic field and in on the collapse) What moving energized aether does is carry EM flux in a direct way, no loss of intensity.


The aether is also able to cohere other energy into electrical energy or fields, this may mean that the intense high frequency EMF could be cohered to add to a lower frequency flux field.


If this happens then the increase in energy will be huge because the required current for a 60hz field to match the inductive power of a 1mhz field is enormous even if the latter is weak.


In short, add all sorts of flux sources to a negative HF HV part of the circuit and with correct tuning you can pull flux from there to a positively charged part of the circuit.


Of course the devil is in the details, but if easy enough to try give it a shot...

[ronotte]

Hi all,

I was just thinking how I might do an experiment, create an LC tank circuit and inductively couple to it and pull power from it.
But I realized that the act of pulling power from it will lower the impedance of the coil killing the resonance, so it would need to be tuned allowing for a given draw of power, more or less would kill the resonance and I assume the power.

The device designed by Wesley and his group is rather unique among several possible solutions: V. Utkin detailed the other solutions.

I Think interesting to share some observations:

1 - Caduceus resonating. In the beginning I tried to resonate it as I saw some increase in output. At the end I'm discovering that leaving it broadband (as it is and even if it does show resonance when put in the real circuit due to the other components attached) perhaps is better. Anyway the caduceus could be swapped with equal efficiency with either a bifilar serial connected coil or a bifilar pancake like I did with my 'pancake' version of the device itself. The purpose of the bifilar or Caduceus coil organization is to create a 'delta Dirac' high energy pulse that charge the interwinding bifilar or caduceus capacitance: so giving way to free quadratic voltage increase of output trumpet. The load on trumpet wave is not seen by the primary due to presence of a free secondary a la Utkin: hence there should be no load problem.

2 - Output power. Here is the problem. The trumpet wave that in my case reached during some run up to 1.3KVpp does contain, at least in my case,  little power. The repetition rate being 200-300Hz. The low available 'mean or rms power' is also low due to high mismatch between the source (pickup coil) and the load (two in series connected 220V/60W bulbs). All is complicated by the SG2 that outputs only a 200nsec 1KV pulses at 300Hz rate...good to charge a cap...but nothing near real power. Actually It (the load) does not kill the output as 'trumpet' remains as before (SG2 isolates the pickup coil output for 99.9% of the time).

Alternative output ways: mach the impedances, eliminate the SG2, use of an output pulse transformer....but, as long as the output rate so low...nothing is going to be good as long as output duty cycle so low!

I could go on for all the day, but I'd like to hear your observations. TNX

Roberto