Pulsed DC Transformer with Embedded Magnets

[XS-NRG]

 

[Bob Smith]

Does anybody know where to find a descent size some 2"+ OD and 6"+ length (preferably with the hole in a middle) ferrite/soft iron core.
Steel/iron pipe - last resort?

I bought some black iron pipes at Home Depot. They cut it to length as well. They might have something close to what you're looking for. It's probably the optimal kind, but thought I'd mention it.
B

[sm0ky2]

@ observer

I understand the point you are trying to make, but i disagree with the fundamental assumptions you are basing it on.

TRUE: it takes energy to artificially establish a magnetic field
TRUE: a permanent magnet does this for free.
this does not mean the permanent magnet provides "energy".
it does not, it provides "force". there is a huge difference.
YES, you can waste energy creating your own force, but why WOULD YOU? when you can just use a magnet.

if you were actually extracting energy from the electrons (which directly affects the protons), the molecular structure of the FE2O3 (or whatever type of magnet you use)  would decay into isotopes and literally break down.
serious "half-life" implications with what you are trying to claim here. this is proven by experiments of a para/dia magnetic interface. depending on the permeability of the substance, either magnetism is lost or the atomic structure becomes unstable.
-----------------------------------------------------------
lets look at it like this, if you were to go out into space, and propel an object of given mass with an acceleration of 9.8m/s^2 it would take an EMORMOUS ammount of energy to keep that up.

if you take that same object and drop it from space into the earth's field, gravity would do this for free.
lead-out??     no lead-on..

the gravitational field only provides FORCE. and it is unidirectional.
yes the object has a great deal of energy by the time it hits the ground, but in theory you started out on earth and had to use just as much energy to get the object up there in the first place.

the magnetic field is no different. except that we can change the direction of the force by changing the direction of current in our coil.
but exactly like gravity, we use just as much energy to cause a vibration in one direction, as the magnetic field kicks back to us in the other. which is why i often compare it to a "spring".
--------------------------------------------------------------
lets go back to the guitar.
if you play lets say a "C" at around 278 Hz,
that means that your string is vibrating back and forth 278 times per second.

so to put that in perspective, an acoustic guitar is like shouting into a cave 278 times per second.
then compare that to a guy shouting in a field.
one would just be a guy shouting in a field...
the other would probably knock you down!
that seems like a lot of energy doesnt it??

its really not.  measure your shout (dB)
then calculate the energy, and multiply by 278.
then multiply again by the number of seconds you shouted for.

and you see it is way more energy than it takes to knock down a person of your size.

this is exactly how the acoustic guitar works, except instead of shouting 278 times, you strum the chord once, and its string-like design holds the waveform in a repetitive pattern until the energy is dissapated. the guitar (or cave) sees the vibrating signal exactly the same as an actual shout ( or the initial strum), and the echo stacks up identically from the string as it would from a repetitive shouting.

if you string a taught-line with a can on one end, and shout down that into the cave, a similar effect will occur. and you wont have to shout so much.

so this "shouting-guitar-cave" is "Lead-out"?  no lead-on

the energy consumed to CREATE initial shout (or strum of the guitar string) is still more than the combined echoes (reverberation) of the signal. and as soon as the source stops, the echoes decay in amplitude until there is nothing left to reflect back through the acoustic chamber.

ths is a well known /well studied aspect of acoustic engineering.
acoustic reverberation is not "overunity" by any sense of the term.

the electric guitar is designed to NOT do this. meaning the acoustic guitar wastes LESS energy to produce its sound.
the accumulation of those soundwaves, however, do not contain more energy than the guitar player (or cave shouter) put into the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------
as far as ferro-inductors are concerned, i have played with my fair-share of Joule-Thiefs and the like.
i've lit the 30-LED for a week with a (mostly) dead battery.

and from my capacitor experiments, i have concluded that this is likely to be an effect of pulse-discharging the battery. not from the ferro-material giving you any sort of feed-back energy.

but thats a topic for a whole other thread. ( in fact i think its split into 4 different threads now)

have i applied resonance to a ferro-core? absolutely not.
sure we can use the cores at pretty much any frequency within its range (determined by permeability)
but this is not the resonant frequency of the core. in fact, from what i understand of ferro/ ceramic cores, it would be difficult to put that much wire on them because of their small size. so,. tell me, what does YOUR resonant ferro-inductor look like? how did you build it? at what frequency does it resonate?

how much energy does it "lead-out" ?? or are you just leading us on.......

[The Observer]

Smokey, Smokey ... Smokey,

Do you know about the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951?

ALL NOVEL SOURCES OF ENERGY MUST BE KEPT SECRET  !!!!
Quote... Unquote.

There is a reason they don't mention leprechans and fairies with magic powers.
There are plenty sources of energy you don't have to pay for...
      and the richest people in the world use thier money
       to keep your money in thier pocket
          by keeping these things secret and people brainwashed.

Fuck.. they even make efficient solar cells illegal !!
          Yes it is true...
Goverments are also afraid of the massive loss in tax revenue that would come with Free Energy.

That is the current paradigm... that is where we are at... that is what is going to be broken down here.

If you don't understand that a speaker uses the magnet's as well as the iron's unpaired electron motion... that's fine.
If you can't hear that an acoustic guitar clearly amplifies sound energy with out paying the electric company... go ahead.

Perhaps there's something we can agree on in the future...

         but for the record I'll stick to my guns when it comes to mixing materials
              with a High Magnetic Permeability and Resonnce of Primary-Transformer and Secondary.

Best Regards,
                       The Observer

[Pirate88179]

Smokey:

Thank your for your post.  This was one of the problems with Lawrence's original topic about his theory.  He, in my opinion, never accounted for the initial energy induced into the system.  He was speaking of pendulums and how much energy they could "lead out".  But, to me these are just energy storage devices, like a battery, and, you don't get out what you put into them much less even more than that.

His math never accounted for the initial energy input.  So, if I have a swing with a weight on it and it is moving at X velocity, I can then "lead out" X + 2 energy out of it.  But wait, how did the swing get to moving in the first place?  That energy was never accounted for in his original theory.  Never.

I have always admired Lawrence for his perseverance and his ability to shake off many vicious insults.  He has more staying power than I do for sure.  But my opinion of his theory is that it leaves out relevant input data, in which case, many other systems could be perceived as OU.

Bill